Long term arrangements

[CoolAmadeus]

Gentlemen, great to see both of you fellow old-timers back, even if it's just for a short visit. But I would be glad to see both of you continue to contribute your wisdom to MERB. You both have interesting stories to tell about "arrangements."

One minor point, CA-in English "friend with benefits" generally does not refer to a relationship where money is exchanged for companionship and/or sex.

FWB=free sex with no romantic connection, a type of relationship that guys always think is great and in which women occasionally engage in hopes of turning the relationship into a romantic one. :smile:

Once you work out a deal for money, then it's either prostitution or a "sugar daddy/baby" relationship. Of course, some say there is really no difference between those two things, but I think there is.

Will try to come back once in a while, but don't take it as granted.
And thanks for the precision about FWB. I knew, just didn't use the right term.

 

[Maria Divina]

A little apart here...

CoolAmadeus!!

Happy to have some good news from you! You are one of the rare person I met only socially in this industry and plus, only once, and gave me one of the best souvenir of kindness.
I am not surprise at all that you can meet such beautiful and extraordinary women with Seeking Arrangements! You have certainly what it takes!!

Happy that you are happy. xox

 

[CoolAmadeus]

Happy to have some good news from you! You are one of the rare person I met only socially in this industry and plus, only once, and gave me one of the best souvenir of kindness.
I am not surprise at all that you can meet such beautiful and extraordinary women with Seeking Arrangements! You have certainly what it takes!!

Thanks for these very kind words!

CA

 

[curly]

Once you work out a deal for money, then it's either prostitution or a "sugar daddy/baby" relationship. Of course, some say there is really no difference between those two things, but I think there is.

I believe that for prostitution to be demonstrated, there must be a direct relationship between money exchange and sex. If you pay something else like tuition or books or a month's rent and you go out socially and have sex casually, there is no direct "per hour" relationship, or at least it is much harder to demonstrate. With your wife or your girlfriend, you may pay her tuition and have sex with her later.

 

[CLOUD 500]

I believe that for prostitution to be demonstrated, there must be a direct relationship between money exchange and sex. If you pay something else like tuition or books or a month's rent and you go out socially and have sex casually, there is no direct "per hour" relationship, or at least it is much harder to demonstrate. With your wife or your girlfriend, you may pay her tuition and have sex with her later.

You can sugar coat it as much as you want to but at the end it is prostitution.

 

[Sol Tee Nutz]

You can sugar coat it as much as you want to but at the end it is prostitution.

I agree with you twice today, looking out the window to see if pigs are flying. ( Old English saying ).

 

[curly]

You can sugar coat it as much as you want to but at the end it is prostitution.

I'm not that naive, I know that..... and so do the girls!

I'm talking about the legalities of it though. But I may be wrong....

 

[pat98]

You can sugar coat it as much as you want to but at the end it is prostitution.

correction: It is legit prostitution as is the marriage ound:

 

[starry]

correction: It is legit prostitution as is the marriage ound:

Exactly. To the extent that marriage often includes the desire/need to have and to raise children it is different in kind not only to long term arrangements but to many other interpersonal relationships so that they are not really comparable. Take that element away and I think that long term arrangements are comparable to many, and perhaps even most, affective relationships between "lovers".
Almost all relationships involve a mutual exchange of benefits of some kind. And frequently a man's primary motive, psychologists tell us, is sex, whereas a woman's is stability/material security. And needless to say socially sanctioned marriage is often a lady's (or man's) vehicle for obtaining material benefits, even when the people involved are not really golddiggers at all - it is genetically encoded, and for a good reason. I don't think a good and successful long term arrangement is at all the same as a one hour exchange of bodily fluids for cash and I would not call it prostitution unless we expand the definition to include many other relationships. And needless to say, a functioning long term arrangement is preferable to an unhappy marriage - of which there are many.

 

[CLOUD 500]

My concern is who does it bring into the game, an equal number of ladies and guys, or an economic mismatch? I think it is an economic mismatch.

For sure it is. I believe on seeking arrangement site there is about a four to one ratio of sugar babies to sugar daddies and even among those sugar daddies many do not have the income. The economy is seriously lagging. In general prices are rising at a much faster rate then salaries and that is the reality. The wealthy are getting wealthier and fewer. The more wealth inequality the more prostitutes and sugar babies we see.

Certainly, there are plenty of great looking women who would do sex work if they could limit the activity to one, or just a few guys.

Certainly, there are guys who have tremendous fear of arrest or getting STDs (both of which are vastly overblown), who might be johns if this activity was "safer" for them.

But the sugar baby system requires quite the outlay of cash. For a typical guy here who might spend $10,000 on this activity and sees ladies in a variety of worldwide markets, that might mean 40 hours of sex if his average price per hour is $250 (way low for the U.S., but even a bit high for Montreal). Most of us love some of our regulars, but realistically those 40 hours of sex would likely be at least 20 or more ladies if all different shapes, sizes, skin colors, ages, and sexual activities. Some will have particular specialties that others will not, or cannot, do. If you want to drop one out of the rotation, you just quit calling or emailing her. One of the great joys is finding new regulars.

Most guys here wouldn't trade that system for spending that $10,000 on one lady, even if they spend 100 hours together a year. There just won't be that much sex, and they just won't have enough in common for him to enjoy that extra time and companionship that much.

But I suspect that plenty of sex workers who really have to work it damn hard to gross $100,000 of revenue a year before agency fees or advertising costs would very gladly trade their current lives of seeing 200-300 customers a year (with some repeats from regulars) for a system where they see 10 sugar daddies at $10,000 a year each. The administrative time goes away and she probably truly dislikes 10-20 percent of those 200-300 customers. And it is easier to milk those 10 guys for 10-15 percent more a year in gifts and tips than it is to try to get tips from johns in a highly rate competitive environment.

I have always thought that regular johns have a lot more to lose from a transition to a sugar baby system than sex workers do. So I have never been to thrilled about its existence personally.

Depends. Those guys seeking sugar babies are those wanting a relationship which for whatever reason is not attainable through conventional means. Sex workers also prefer a sugar daddy as it is almost consistent revenue which you get far more easily then constantly posting escort ads, working a MPs, or working at the stripclub. Lastly I agree with you I am not myself too thrilled about its existence. If I am to seek a relationship I want it to be one no based on money. I want it to be a genuine relationship.

 

[CoolAmadeus]

But I suspect that plenty of sex workers who really have to work it damn hard to gross $100,000 of revenue a year before agency fees or advertising costs would very gladly trade their current lives of seeing 200-300 customers a year (with some repeats from regulars) for a system where they see 10 sugar daddies at $10,000 a year each. The administrative time goes away and she probably truly dislikes 10-20 percent of those 200-300 customers. And it is easier to milk those 10 guys for 10-15 percent more a year in gifts and tips than it is to try to get tips from johns in a highly rate competitive environment.

I think escorting and meeting guys with an arragement are TOTALLY different things. From what I've seen on SeekingArrangement, I'd say 80% of the women there are looking for one guy, not 5, not 10, just ONE.

For most SP, escorting is their main source of revenue (although there are exceptions), whereas women on SA are looking for financial help (or NSA pleasure, depending). There's a BIG difference between meeting a guy a few times a week or a month for, say, $1000, then see 200-300 guys a year for, say, $100k a year. The reason for doing it is just not the same. Obviously there is also those golddiggers who are there to milk as many guys as possible, for as much money as possible, but they do not represent the majority in my opinion (you just have to filter out those looking for "practical", "moderate", "substancial" or "high" lifestyles).

All the rest is a financial arrangement, you may " like" or prefer one more than the other or they may like you, it may even be fun, exiting, and worth every penny to you, but don't confuse it with love. They will drop you as soon as the money runs out.

The majority of these long term relationships described here are between a middle aged man and a twenty something or thirty something woman, get real, look in the mirror, and stop trying to justify something different to yourself.
If it works for you great, enjoy it, everybody deserves to be happy and they can spend their money on whatever they want.

Interresting point of view. I know I'll probably start a polemic here...

I guess it all depends on the type of relationship you have with the other person. Obviously if you meet an SP once, or if you see her only a few times, there is no real "relationship" and as soon as you stop paying, it all stops. That's a given. However, although there is obviously no love (which might still happen by the way, even if only rarely), I disagree with your "They will drop you as soon as the money runs out". Obviously if all you were doing is get your fun and leave, yeah, probably. But if you treat these women as women, not as objects, if you have real interests in them, and not just for their bodies, in many cases it will be reciprocal and they will remain friends. Yes, in most cases they will stop having sex with you, and if this is all they meant for you, then yes, they will drop you.

I agree with you though, the younger the woman is compared to you, the less likely she'll remain friend with you in the end.

In my many years of hobbying, I befriend quite a few women, sometimes during months or years after our last intimate session (many I'm still friend with). Obviously after some time our lives go in totally different directions and we end up losing track of each other, and it's just normal.

By the way, I have been dropped too, even by someone who I became close to, and in retrospect it was my own apparent lack of interest (primarily by lack of time) that probably made her cut all links. It happens to everyone. Yup, me too, despite my rant here! LOL

Basically, what I'm saying is, most of the time it's depends on our own behavior if we are dropped or not. Respect and interest in the other person - as a person - goes a long way!

CA

 

[CLOUD 500]

correction: It is legit prostitution as is the marriage ound:

Nah. One cannot project their own bad experience with marriage and say all are the same. Just got to find the right woman.

 

[CLOUD 500]

I'm not that naive, I know that..... and so do the girls!

I'm talking about the legalities of it though. But I may be wrong....

Okay this is different. Since there is no direct exchange for money and sex it is not deemed prostitution by the Bible therefore not illegal in US law. Have you ever wondered a girl getting paid to have sex with a man is illegal in the US but if it is for making a porn film it becomes legal and is not prostitution.

 

[starry]

Most guys here wouldn't trade that system for spending that $10,000 on one lady, even if they spend 100 hours together a year. There just won't be that much sex, and they just won't have enough in common for him to enjoy that extra time and companionship that much.

And thats my point. What most guys are after in their hobbying is above all sex, and so that is the primary driver. And if what you are after is far and away the sex why wouldn't you look to spend your money on meeting as many beautiful women as possible. That thinking would probably even argue against having regulars. But, if while remaining important sex by itself is not really your primary motivation then arrangements, of which there are different types, can offer something that I would consider better. All depends what you are after. I certainly don't get the same satisfaction from attachments that are mostly only sexual than I do from one where there is more than that going on and I prefer and would rather spend my money on the latter not the former (not to say that money paid for sex is poorly spent).

 

[starry]

In my mind there are two"loving relationships" between a man and a woman that includes sex, one is having a wife the other is having a girlfriend, and yes some girl friends and wifes could be in it for financial reasons.

All the rest is a financial arrangement, you may " like" or prefer one more than the other or they may like you, it may even be fun, exiting, and worth every penny to you, but don't confuse it with love. They will drop you as soon as the money runs out.

The majority of these long term relationships described here are between a middle aged man and a twenty something or thirty something woman, get real, look in the mirror, and stop trying to justify something different to yourself.
If it works for you great, enjoy it, everybody deserves to be happy and they can spend their money on whatever they want.

As the Dude would say, "that's just like your opinion man".
So let me understand this: there are only two "loving" relationships, wives and girlfriends, even if the wives and girlfriends are in it for financial reasons. And what will happen, and indeed what does mostly happen, when the "financial reasons" are actually not there, or are no longer there? With great frequency the relationship implodes under the weight of disappointed expectations basically when "the money runs out" as you say. It is certainly one of the most common causes of marital and relationship breakup. Looks to me that the arrangement scenario can be more upfront and honest than conventional relationships that when you get down to it are entered into on the basis of pretence.
Of course there is another important cause of marriage and relationship breakup. It is the unpreparedness and immaturity of one or both of the participants. And this brings me to your second point. You seem to think that it is axiomatic that a woman in her mid-to late twenties could not credibly enter into a relationship with say a man in his 40s or mid-forties. Frankly I was amazed to be reading so conventional and so discredited a notion. It is well known that many younger women are genuinely attracted to older men than their equivalent age male counterparts. And the reasons are not hard to figure out. Women mature sooner than men and sexual desire in women is driven more by mutual compatibility than pure unadulterated sexual pleasure (unlike men, who mostly want sex). That is a clinically observed fact and explains a lot of May-September relationships. An older man in his 40s has a better chance of satisfying these needs than a man in his mid- twenties (these are general observations and of course there are exceptions to everything). And of course he is more likely to have stability in his financial situation - hey but we've agreed (haven't we?) that there is nothing wrong or unnatural in the prospect of a comfortable life exerting a certain force of attraction.
And speaking for myself I have no problem looking into a mirror. As Julio Jones was heard to remark "lookin' good, feelin' good".

 

[starry]

You da man Rumple!
BTW I find the expression "sugar daddy" to be accurate but is also descriptive in a deeper way than is accounted for merely by age differential. I love the girl and I desire her the way a man desires a woman, but at the same time, because I am older I guess I also love her th way I would imagine a father loves his daughter - I worry about her needs and want only the best for her.
According to conventional notions I guess thats pretty perverse.

 

[starry]

Sam, you are thinking like a man. Maybe you should listen to your feminine side. I'm not saying that women are indifferent to male physical beauty, but (more than young men) they are attracted as much and frequently more by whats in your head (the one above, not below) and in your heart. If you believe otherwise I think you are not giving them all the credit they deserve. Oh and BTW y'know some guys in their forties and fifties are not bad looking at all.
I know a mid-20s lady who is into sexual pleasure more than I would think many other girls her age are (without getting into clinical diagnostics). But she is fairly typical in other respects. She has periodic encounters with a guy her age because he is great in bed and prolly has tremendous stamina. But you know what, she does not especially like the guy and would never in a million years consider spending any other lets call it quality time with him.
There is no doubt that I cant perform sexually to the level I could when I was 20 years old, but I can still perform and probably with years of practice that I've had better than some younger, more virile gents. But do you really think women think only in terms of the # of SOGS per session? Again you are thinking like a man, and forgive me for saying so but an adolescent one at that.
And age differential relationships are nothing new. My grandfather was about 15 years older than my grandmum (on my fathers side) and pretty much the same w/respect to my maternal grandparents. These were successful relationships. My mom and dad were the same age. Their marriage was a disaster.

 

[CLOUD 500]

Sam21,

You nailed it on right there. One also has to remember only a minority of women decide to seek out a sugar daddy or to work as a prostitute. Girls seeking a sugar daddy are materialistic. Nothing wrong it is her right but it is what it is. She can have more then one sugar daddy also. This is a fantasy world and there is nothing genuine about this. Now what I am about to say I know I will be attacked but I think it needs to be said. Many of the men seeking a sugar baby or even a prostitute have unrealistic expections themselves as they are superficial. They seek young, beautiful that gives the best sex. So they got no choice but to pay. Donald Trump is no different. Some also had bad experiences with their own relationships and marriage, some had a poor sex life so they try to compensate at an older age or to try to live as if they are young again and some have a void and try to fill in that void by trying to buy affection.

 

[starry]

Cloud 500, you (and Sam) are wrong, or at least are wrong in generalizing your conclusions. Sure some young ladies who enter into arrangements are just goldiggers. Some sugar dadies are suckers who can't see straight. Doesn't mean they all are.
Oh and before I forget, the normal one or two hour session is more likely to be the fantasy than the long term arrangement, though of course they can both be that.

 

[jalimon]

I find some are starting to believe the fantasy they are living and paying for.

So much agree. It is a fantasy. As it should be. I do not care paying for it as long as it remains a fantasy. And as a girl recently told me, for me I enjoy spending time with you and on top I find you cute so I get the best of it haha that is what should be the building blocks of a long term arrangements.

Cheers,