The Arrangement A Lot Of Women Have But Won't Admit
I once went to a dinner in Santa Monica hosted by somebody who verbally invited a friend of mine and invited me, I guess, because I was there at the time, or because she doesn't know me well enough. The women there were all what I call "Montana Avenue Mommies." It's one of the spoiled sections of Los Angeles.
The women were all divorced, and all dripped with hate for their exes and talked for a great while about how they could squeeze more cash out of them. Now, I'm all for people -- women and men -- supporting the children they produce, but this was something else, it seemed to me -- sheer hatred for men, and the greed of women who took the easy way out career-wise (so it seemed from a few I talked to), figuring they could get a man to pay for them.
One of the women said, at some point (guess I'm not great at hiding my disgust), "It sounds like you kinda don't respect us." My friend, who knows me well, almost ducked. I responded, "Well, I kinda don't." I left shortly afterward. "Bye! Thanks!" Whoops.
People are now up in arms about this article on The Daily Beast, about a woman who has a rather open "pay for play" arrangement with a man, but how different is it from the arrangement so many women have to have, because they take jobs where they can't really ever earn a substantial living? Melissa Beech writes:
...When I got to college, I spent the first two years straining for financial independence. I tried working, but in retail, surrounded by temptation all day, I spent more than I made. Waiting tables was exhausting. I went on several job interviews, but all of the internships were unpaid. As my years in college wore on, it was evident that the job market was sliding into decline. When the economic climate grew worse, my friends panicked that their resumes and high GPAs wouldn't be enough to give them a leg up on the competition, and my goal became getting my foot in the door before everyone else.And then, just such an opportunity presented itself. During my job hunt, I met a potential employer. He was in his early 30s, single, and successful. He didn't hire me, but he did suggest a position that seemed perfectly suited to my attributes and skills: He proposed that he become my benefactor.
From the outside, a mutually beneficial, or sugar daddy, relationship seems immoral. Maybe even the distant cousin of -- dare I say it? -- prostitution. But truth be told, women have used their wiles and charms to get ahead for years.
There's even a social networking Web site that connects sugar daddies and their beneficiaries. This man told me about it: SeekingArrangement.com. He had been referred to it by a close friend who was a hedge fund manager. At his urging, I logged onto the site and looked at his profile. It didn't have a picture, for privacy reasons. But it did contain information: his marital status (single), the industry he worked in (media and communications), and -- a key element -- his salary (seven figures). I was encouraged by the fact that the Web site vets its clients and offers only Certified Sugar Daddies, whose tax returns have been carefully examined so you know what you're getting. I also learned that he was attracted to bright, smart women -- he wasn't in the market for the dumb bombshell. His profile said he wanted more of "a Jackie Kennedy than a Marilyn Monroe." I fit the type.
It presented me with an opportunity I never would have thought to consider. Being in a relationship that was like a business arrangement? Where was the romance in that? I toyed with the idea for a few weeks, mulling over the possible repercussions. The pros were evident: This man was a successful professional in the media community who could provide me with excellent connections. But there was the social stigma to consider. And did I even like this guy? I wasn't sure. So I agreed to meet him for dinner to discuss how this should go, if it were to happen. I also had several questions I wanted answered.
So we had dinner, and I was surprised to find that he had questions for me. He wanted to know what newspapers I read, what my favorite book is and why, where I stood on the political spectrum, and how I liked to spend my Saturdays. I was intrigued when many of our answers were similar.
He was a likable person, and by the end of the evening I found myself very attracted to him. I laid out my ground rules and he laid out his. He was looking for this type of a relationship because his past girlfriends hadn't understood that his work would always come first. He valued their place in his life but ended up resenting them because of the stress and pressure they placed on his already hectic lifestyle. Then, much as I could imagine him doing while standing at the head of a conference table in a boardroom, he presented what I'll call his financial package.
He offered me a monthly allowance, guaranteed a steady stream of desirable gifts, and promised regular vacations. He offered to send my friends and me on girls' weekend getaways to spas and resorts. Other trips, he said, could be working vacations for the both of us, some fun mixed with some hands-on learning for me. And yet others could be just the two of us seeing the most amazing and beautiful places in the world. We discussed places we had both been and would like to share with each other. When he learned I had never been to London he was dying to have that experience with me.
...We started out on a trial basis, but in the first month I was already swept off my feet. He was very busy with work so we only saw each other in person a few times, but he put effort into the relationship nonetheless. We went to Atlantic City for a weekend and stayed at the Borgata, the poshest hotel in town. We spent the day on the beach, and even took a nighttime tour of the city by helicopter. When we finally had sex, it was at the right time -- I waited three months before I felt ready to make a physical commitment to him. This was no different from any of my other relationships. We've now been seeing each other for a year.
As for the allowance, he doesn't just cut me a check. He simply ensures that I need never worry about expenses. I rent a $1,600 apartment in the city, for which he pays the rent in full. I carry an AmEx Black card in both our names, and use it for things like shopping, spa trips, manicures, and tanning; the bill goes to him. And the company car I drive costs him around $700 a month for the lease and the insurance. I've even managed to build up a little nest egg over the past year -- at his insistence -- putting away around $12,000. All in all, he probably spends in the ballpark of $5,000 a month on my lifestyle.
He didn't hire me for the internship position, but because of him I have had several internships at well-known PR companies, and have plenty of networking opportunities, shoring up my future prospects for when I graduate this spring. Besides career advancements, he's given me a chance to live the type of life I never would have experienced on my own. We went to London and Paris last spring, where we saw the sights and shopped at stores like Chanel and Dior. How many other college students are wearing Christian Louboutins to class?
Probably very few. And I'm well aware that this is the kind of relationship where there are no guarantees for your heart, but it's helped me prepare for the future and thrive in the present. And when our time together is through, I will part with a lifelong friend, a great career, and a killer wardrobe.
I really don't understand in the least, the problem that anyone would have with this, yet am unsurprised that this article has probably gotten a great deal of hammering.
Gods forbid one should enjoy the relationship they have, even if they are absolutely open and honest about it's parameters.
DuWayne at December 19, 2008 7:55 AM
>>And when our time together is through, I will part with a lifelong friend, a great career, and a killer wardrobe.
Sweet words, sister.
But no more a guarantee of a happy outcome than the traditional marriage vow, surely?
Jody Tresidder at December 19, 2008 8:04 AM
> when our time together is through,
> I will part with a lifelong friend,
> a great career, and a killer wardrobe.
Why stop there? Why not haul him in front of a judge and demand continuing support? She'll have all this evidence that he'd supported her in good style for a long time. Why wouldn't the judge agree that it was reasonable for her to assume it wouldn't end? She pretends to be very legalistic about the contractual nature of their union, but doesn't describe the termination clause with any specificity. Her pleasures and fulfillment are listed in detail, while the mention of her career falls into a single sentence of 'networking and shoring up prospects' for graduation: This woman is no student. This ends badly.
A more likely scenario, one I've seen in my own excursions on Montana Avenue (I used to live on it, in the Brentwood part) is that she'll make a baby whose presence seals the father's responsibilities to them both, and who will essentially be raised by some Guatemalan maid.
This is a piece is fiction. It's working too hard to say "Well, Mr.-and-Mrs. Middle Class, with your bitterness and your unhappy marriages... What do you think of this?!?!" Take a look at the photos on the web page that comes up when you Google the name. The busty, youthful girl (Not the author! The editors want to make that perfectly clear! The name is a pseudonym!) is enjoying a gaily-colored drink in a warm pool behind a wide smile. I think the newspaper published this to give its readers something to cluck about. If it was written as a shameless indulgence of the soap-opera impulses beating in every heart, that's not a crime. (Presumably, this is why Amy linked it. It's fun.)
(And it's a wonderfully old story. Helen Gurley Brown, who essentially invented the fantasy of being a female power player in New York publishing, has described be a kept woman [in much younger days] without bitterness.)
But if the purpose of this article is to remind people that modern marriages aren't getting the job done for people emotionally, sexually, or financially, it's got nothing to teach. The whole point of western romantic marriages, the part that Disney fantasies can so readily corrupt, is that a marriage is built with someone who can mean something special to you. The two in this couple are obviously too narcissistic to register the presence of another human being as anything but an opportunity for exploitation.
Even if this story came out of India, where Bollywood's loveless marriages are the norm, it couldn't be more mundane.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at December 19, 2008 8:23 AM
I would hope that he was smart enough to outline the exit clause, because there is no way she would want to leave a gravy train like this one. I also get the feeling that she will get emotionally invested in this guy ("swept off my feet"?), so nomatter how calculating an arrangement this is meant to be, she will probably get hurt, if for no other reason than that she is young. We mature women are made of harder stuff, but even I start to have FEELINGS after about a year of awesome sex. Oh well.
Chrissy at December 19, 2008 8:34 AM
All sex is prostitution.
This relationship is just a bit more frank about the arrangement.
brian at December 19, 2008 9:35 AM
There was a case out of New York this, or last year. A man was sued by his ex mistress for finacial support and won
lujlp at December 19, 2008 9:43 AM
Melissa Beech, the kept woman, says "But truth be told, women have used their wiles and charms to get ahead for years." Actually, no doubt, since way before the human genus appeared. But "for years" is good enough to justify the following poem.
THE RUINED MAID
by: Thomas Hardy (1840-1928)
" 'Melia, my dear, this does everything crown!
Who could have supposed I should meet you in Town?
And whence such fair garments, such prosperi-ty?"--
"O didn't you know I'd been ruined?" said she.
"You left us in tatters, without shoes or socks,
Tired of digging potatoes, and spudding up docks;
And now you've gay bracelets and bright feathers three!"--
"Yes: that's how we dress when we're ruined," said she.
-- "At home in the barton you said `thee' and `thou,'
And `thik oon,' and `theäs oon,' and `t'other'; but now
Your talking quite fits 'ee for high compa-ny!"--
"Some polish is gained with one's ruin," said she.
-- "Your hands were like paws then, your face blue and bleak
But now I'm bewitched by your delicate cheek,
And your little gloves fit as on any la-dy!"--
"We never do work when we're ruined," said she.
-- "You used to call home-life a hag-ridden dream,
And you'd sigh, and you'd sock; but at present you seem
To know not of megrims or melancho-ly!"--
"True. One's pretty lively when ruined," said she.
-- "I wish I had feathers, a fine sweeping gown,
And a delicate face, and could strut about Town!"--
"My dear -- a raw country girl, such as you be,
Cannot quite expect that. You ain't ruined," said she.
"The Ruined Maid" is reprinted from Poems of the Past and Present. Thomas Hardy. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1902.
Axman at December 19, 2008 9:55 AM
Brian, care to elaborate on the "all sex is prostitution" statement? From the general theme of your commenting, it sounds unlikely that you've been around enough women to make that kind of judgment.
CB at December 19, 2008 10:10 AM
I'm curious to hear your elaboration as well Brian, do tell.
Charles at December 19, 2008 10:30 AM
You know, I think I might buy this notion that this arrangement is setting her up well to become independent had she not done such a good job of sounding like an irresponsible idiot.
For one, she thinks that her arrangement is a "distant cousin" of prostitution? Darling, try niece. Maybe sister. You are having a physical relationship for money. He pays all of your bills, and in return he expects you to give him a good time without making demands. Okay, so maybe there's a bit of geisha in there (given that her job involves more than just the physical), and they took some time working up to it, but ...
Second, and more important, she's now getting used to living a $5,000 per month lifestyle. (Well, more than that when you factor in the trips.) In a year, she's put away $1,000 per month. Sounds great. Except that this was the girl who, when working retail, couldn't resist temptation and *spent more than she earned.* So some day, this guy drops her. Say it's been 5 years, and she's got $60,000 in the bank when he does it. Want to bet that money in the bank lasts her more than (at most) a year?
TheOtherOne at December 19, 2008 10:36 AM
Unsavory at best. He is an arrogant fool (given the legal arsenal at her disposal), and she is so very liberated -- the ultimate feminist. Of course, she is also a fool if she thinks that she will be (while she lasts) anything other than a deluded member of a modern harem.
Jay R at December 19, 2008 10:45 AM
Housewife Charged In Sex-For-Security Scam
AKRON, OH—Area resident Helen Crandall, 44, was arrested by Akron police Sunday, charged with conducting an elaborate "sex for security" scam in which she allegedly defrauded husband Russell Crandall out of nearly $230,000 in cash, food, clothing and housing over the past 19 years using periodic offers of sexual intercourse.
...
During the arrest, Akron police officials entered the Crandall household and seized more than 150 items Mrs. Crandall had received from her husband over the last 19 years, including a four-speed adjustable food processor, 12 pairs of earrings, a matching sofa and loveseat, a box of two-ply kitchen garbage bags, and a portable radio.
In exchange for these items, Agee said, Crandall's husband received sex an estimated 950 times—most frequently in the master bedroom, but also in the downstairs den three times, and once on the floor of the sewing room.
In addition to physical evidence, Akron police have collected considerable eyewitness testimony. More than 250 Akron residents have come forward to report seeing Helen and Russell Crandall together, and several said they witnessed Mr. Crandall flagrantly purchasing items for his wife.
"Sure, they'd come in here," said Ray Greene of Greene's House and Home. "I think the last time they got one of those box fans with the three settings."
Perhaps the most damaging testimony has come from Mr. Crandall himself, who on Tuesday told police that while the couple was dating in 1977, Mrs. Crandall—then known as Helen Steuben—demanded that he buy her a ring worth over $1,000 before he could have sex with her. The first sexual liaison took place some six months later at Bob's Honeymooner Hotel during an all-expenses-paid trip to Niagara Falls.
More at the link (at the Onion)
jerry at December 19, 2008 10:50 AM
> All sex is prostitution.
Hi Brian! Remember Sobchak from Lewbowski?
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at December 19, 2008 11:02 AM
First of all, I suspect that this "Melissa Beech" is a hoax. The whole article just reads too pat; if I were going to write a hoax artice about a kept woman, I wouldn't change a word.
But if it is true, the woman is deluded. No matter how many presents and trips and expensive baubles she receives, no matter how many legal actions she files later, she will never get what she thinks she is getting from him.
Cousin Dave at December 19, 2008 11:16 AM
If she's intelligent, then it's great! She can, in theory, get her degree and even start working at her entry job, all the while having this cushion. If she's stupid, she'll live off his largess and not plan for the future. Wish I'd known about that website when I was in college.
I've been known to tell DH "Gee, if I didn't have to clean the kitchen tonite, I'd have energy for sex!" Guess I'm a whore. Oh well.
momof3 at December 19, 2008 11:26 AM
more power to them... my only wonder is how having a contractural agreement limits such a relationship. Will they feel they could never make it permanent because it started out as a contractural agreement? There is a vast difference between fact and truth. She has certainly laid out the facts, but I'd hate to be around when the truth happens.
Anywho, Amy's second paragraph is a fact that will cause me to have a defensible pre-nup, should I ever be taken with the insanity to get hitched again... just to level the playing field a bit.
SwissArmyD at December 19, 2008 11:28 AM
Crid - Never saw the film.
CB and Charles - (who are probably the same person): It's quite simple. Women don't put out for free. They always get some form of compensation for it. Whether dinner, shiny baubles, or a wedding ring. Sex in exchange for material compensation is prostitution.
Marriage is just a social construct we've created to hide the payment, and therefore take the "shame" off of it.
brian at December 19, 2008 11:31 AM
>>Women don't put out for free.
Says you, brian.
(Had a bad week? Is that it?)
Jody Tresidder at December 19, 2008 11:42 AM
Have you guys seen The Onion 2056 yet?
http://www.theonion.com/2056-06-22/
off topic I know but funny nonetheless
lujlp at December 19, 2008 11:50 AM
Brian, I know from personal experience the some women do 'put out for free'. Some of them want it more, and more often than I do.
Amy said "One of the women said, at some point (guess I'm not great at hiding my disgust), "It sounds like you kinda don't respect us." My friend, who knows me well, almost ducked. I responded, "Well, I kinda don't." "
I'm glad I wasn't drinking anything when I read that. Amy, you sure you're not British? From everything I've read of yours, that had to be quite the understatement.
William at December 19, 2008 11:53 AM
"Women don't put out for free. They always get some form of compensation for it. Whether dinner, shiny baubles, or a wedding ring."
-Paging Jeff.
A wise friend once told me, "if it flies, floats, or fucks, it's cheaper to rent." But 5k a month, damn! I would need a timeshare arrangement at those prices.
smurfy at December 19, 2008 12:04 PM
Jesus brian, a little bitter are we?
I have been with a great many women who really just wanted to fuck - believe it or not, many women like sex just as much as boys. I think the problem here isn't women, it's you. You rather strike me as a bitter, miserable (regardless of actual age) old fuck who pretty much hates everything and everyone around you. With your attitude, it's a wonder you can get it when your paying cash.
DuWayne at December 19, 2008 12:30 PM
> Never saw the film.
It clicked into place for me last week: Your comments have always been reminiscent of Goodman's finest characterization.
> (Had a bad week? Is that it?)
Jody, show some respect, little miss smarty-pants! All sex is prostitution, OKAY!??!?!
And some guys are just too dignified to get laid....
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at December 19, 2008 12:37 PM
Not a matter of dignity, crid. I'm not a good enough liar, and I can't be bothered to do the amount of work required.
DuWayne - not bitter. Disgusted. I've been disgusted with the human race since I was about 13. Nothing I've seen has done anything to mitigate that disgust. As far as cash goes - never tried (the penalties aren't worth it in my book). But I suspect, were I to enter a brothel in Reno, that I'd be told that they were closed.
brian at December 19, 2008 12:54 PM
See also.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at December 19, 2008 12:55 PM
Sign me up for that! I could dig "working" for a guy like that, and coming home to my BF - damn, if I could get BF to agree to letting me have that kind of "job", all of our financial problems would be gone, baby, gone! But, alas, BF would most assuredly object to sharing me. (Yes, I'm that damn good in bed. Go ahead, ask him!) o.O
Flynne at December 19, 2008 1:10 PM
Not sure what you're saying there, Crid.
I'm not "alone", really. I just don't share my living space with another human being. I don't do romance or intimacy at all. Never have. Wouldn't know how. And sex seems an insufficient incentive for me to try to put up with another human being in an intimate way.
brian at December 19, 2008 1:10 PM
ACK! Crid I just checked the Sobchak and Lebowski links - there're action figures?? I gotta gets me a couple...
o.O
Flynne at December 19, 2008 1:16 PM
Brian, are you my ex-husband?? O.O
Flynne at December 19, 2008 1:17 PM
Wow.
Understand that this makes it difficult to trust your judgment about sex, prostitution, or almost any other human bond, erotic or not. Your experience of the world is not like the one that other people have.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at December 19, 2008 1:21 PM
Flynne -
No. I hope I've never fucked up anyone's life, but I can't guarantee it.
Crid - You're getting dangerously close to a "Starship Troopers" type of dismissal here.
brian at December 19, 2008 1:24 PM
Eh, I'm not impressed. Whether you are dependent on a husband for money, or on a sugar daddy for money, you're still dependent. On a man. For money. Because what, you're so scatterbrained and useless, you can't even live on a budget and pay your own bills? Oh, poor helpless me, I worked in retail and just couldn't say no to all the crap on the racks. Oh, poor helpless me, being a waitress made me tired. For godssake woman, grow a set.
I worked my ASS off when I was her age. My whole reason for even going to college was because I didn't want to be a grown woman and either have to ask some damn husband for an allowance, or be stuck in a house full of roommates. I like living alone, and on my own terms. Truth be told, I worked a lot harder at her age than I do now. (Heh!)
I knew women like the ones Amy mentioned at the beginning of this entry, who were dependent on husbands for money and complained that their husbands didn't make enough money. I'd always think hey honey, why don't YOU make more money? Why don't YOU go to school, learn a skill, and get off that fat ass for five minutes? I think their lack of independence is what makes them so bitter. It has to suck, knowing deep down that you're utterly helpless to stand on your own two feet as an adult. This silly bimbo, if the story is even true, is no exception. She's a wimp, and would never last on RAGBRAI.
Pirate Jo at December 19, 2008 1:40 PM
Jo -
There is a certain subset of "liberated woman" who sees that liberation through the lens of what she can get without doing an actual day job.
How this form of liberation is substantively different than Victorian marriage is beyond my comprehension.
brian at December 19, 2008 1:45 PM
Brian- Love and intimacy are central to the human experience in ways that warmaking is not. Again- Consider the patriot Sobchak in Lebowski.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at December 19, 2008 1:49 PM
Brian ... why would you CB and I are the same person??? I've only ever posted under my own name.
Charles at December 19, 2008 1:55 PM
ooops ... "you think CB and I ..."
Charles at December 19, 2008 1:56 PM
Brian, I know you're not. I was just SO surprised by your answer to Crid that it knocked me for a loop for a minute. My heart aches for you, sweetie.
Flynne at December 19, 2008 1:59 PM
Flynne:
Ah. I don't see why you would be, though. not like it's a big secret.1
Why? I don't feel a thing.
brian at December 19, 2008 2:02 PM
Crid:
Then I guess I'm not really human then, Am I?
brian at December 19, 2008 2:04 PM
brian -
Honestly, no, by the sounds of it you're basically a sociopath - any claim to being human is pretty strictly biological.
DuWayne at December 19, 2008 2:15 PM
Sociopath? Really?
Isn't that a bit random? I mean, the only people I actively seek to hurt are the ones whose stupidity directly threatens me.
And other than the few people I am close to, everyone else is pretty much background noise.
So, perhaps it's a bit of hyperbole for me to say I hate humanity, or I hate everyone. In large part, it's more a matter of I simply don't care.
If you don't have a direct impact on my life, you only exist in the most abstract way.
brian at December 19, 2008 2:21 PM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2008/12/the-arrangement.html#comment-1615060">comment from Pirate JoEh, I'm not impressed. Whether you are dependent on a husband for money, or on a sugar daddy for money, you're still dependent. On a man. For money. Because what, you're so scatterbrained and useless, you can't even live on a budget and pay your own bills?
Totally agree with you, Pirate Jo. I've always decided that the only one who would support me is me.
Amy Alkon
at December 19, 2008 2:23 PM
I once lived in New Orleans for a time. I lived in a small townhouse/apt complex that had a private pool on the second floor that all of the apartments looked out over, which made this place a very social spot to live.
There was a very attractive lady in her late 30's there that I got to know a little bit. During a discussion one evening I happened to ask what she did for a living. She tried to change the subject, but I'm not always that great at picking out those subtle cues, and I persisted.
Eventually, she told me that she was a "kept woman". At first I thought she was joking, but it became pretty clear that she was not.
Besides the fact that it was all very new and interesting to me (I haven't met anyone before or since that admitted to being in that situation.), I was very struck by the impression that she did not seem very happy.
fustian at December 19, 2008 3:56 PM
So 'brian' feels disgust with the human race in general, but is close to a few individuals. Nothing strange there.
And he has no desire for or interest in romantic intimacy. Well, so? Maybe he just doesn't get the same buzz off of it that the rest of us do. I know who people who are like that with weed. If being in love with someone didn't make you light up and feel joy, what's left would just be another random and possibly annoying person at worst, or a platonic friend at best. If you pity him for the good stuff he's missed out on, and weigh it against the grief it's saved him, maybe it comes out even in the end.
Pirate Jo at December 19, 2008 5:02 PM
Pirate Jo said "If you pity him for the good stuff he's missed out on, and weigh it against the grief it's saved him, maybe it comes out even in the end."
Maybe so, but it seems like he's half alive. People are social creatures. I'm even a social creature, though less so than every one I know except my brother. I'm sure he doesn't want our pity, but I'm glad I'm not him.
Pirate Jo, how many miles is the RAGBRAI? Some of us (in central TX) were thinking of doing it last year, but procrastinated too long to get signed up with a reasonable chance of getting in. My wife would have a hard time with me being gone a week, and I don't think she'll even get in the kind of shape to do it, so I don't know if I will do it any year soon.
William at December 19, 2008 5:28 PM
No, I assure you I am fully alive. How do you define "social creature"? Does it require going out to bars every night? Or meeting new people on a regular basis? Or does the "social" requirement get met from having a few good friends you spend your time with?
I find large groups of people tiring. Why? Who knows. There's probably a dozen things I could bring up, and all of them are certain to be wrong. What I do know is that after going to the Big E (county fair in Mass), I need to spend a few days to recover.
And you're right about the pity part. I neither want nor need pity. I appreciate the sentiment, but I assure you, it's not necessary.
brian at December 19, 2008 5:43 PM
Expanding on a point someone else alluded to, the best 2 lines were these:
"From the outside, a mutually beneficial, or sugar daddy, relationship seems immoral. Maybe even the distant cousin of — dare I say it? — prostitution."
OF COURSE It's Prostitution!!! I, for one, am not even passing judgment on the pair. But it's laughable that this woman has convinced herself that it's not really the "P" word. De-nial is more than just a River in Egypt, baby!
Robert W. at December 19, 2008 5:54 PM
It's not my place to judge what does or doesn't work for other people. But I know that this arrangement would never have worked for me, as tempting as it would have been when I was young and broke. I'm just far too much of a romantic. Either I would have fallen in love with the guy in a matter of months, or he would have ended up repulsing me. Either way it would have been very messy. Am I that weird for this? In the previous post about hooking up, I had similar trouble relating. Sex has always been about love to me. And I can't think of a time since puberty that I haven't desired to be in a relationship.
Karen at December 19, 2008 5:55 PM
"Maybe so, but it seems like he's half alive."
Bullshit. Are you telling me that you are half alive if you don't have a relationship involving sex?
Do you think Jesus had sex? Do you think he was half alive? I do not have sex with the most of people, who I really care the most. That includes my parents, family members, my orchids and clients, who pay my sub prime mortgage.
I find a relationship without sex can bring out the best humanity among us. When I see a nude picture of Marilyn Monroe, I feel alive but I never had a sex with her. I feel the same thing when I see a beautiful bloody red sunset.
Chang at December 19, 2008 6:16 PM
Having complained that my DH doesn't make enough money, and not working, let me field that one as to WHY we don't go get a job or make more money. DH and I made a decision to have kids. It's why we're married. While he agreed that staying home or not was my choice, he also didn't want to put the kids in daycare. And I, for one, see no point in having kids that you pay someone else to raise. Rent a dog, if that's what you're looking for. So I stay home and don't work. I also don't buy Prada or eat lunch out. It's my job to raise the kids, Dh's job to make the money to pay the bills and be a dad at night. Pretty simple. I don't expect him to run home midday and change a diaper, and he doesn't expect me to bring in money.
He's insured so if he dies, I have breathing room before needing to reenter the workforce in what I am well aware will be an entry-level job. It doesn't mean I'm dependent. He works and so do I. And here in Texas, nifty state that it is, half his paycheck is legally mine. I can go borrow money to buy a car based on his income and do not have to have him sign.
momof3 at December 19, 2008 6:41 PM
Why is it that when someone says sociopath, people get visions of someone who hates humanity? I blame our education system.
A sociopath most certainly does not hate humanity, they lack the capacity - thus they are a sociopath. While it is not a common pathology by any means, it is far more common than most people think. The vast majority of sociopaths don't ever commit a crime. That might lead to their arrest and/or other discomforts.
A sociopath is merely one who lacks the capacity to feel, which, given brian's response to Flynne Why? I don't feel a thing. and his general attitude, I figured was a reasonable assumption.
The only things that seem to get any sort of a rise out of brian, are things that interfere with his life in some way or another. Every comment I have seen from him, indicates a complete and utter disregard for others, or indicates complete self-absorption and selfishness.
I did not make that comment with any sense of moral judgment or criticism. Any such notions are completely irrelevant. If brian actually is a sociopath, or borderline, there is nothing he can do about it - it is who he is. If he's not, he's just another asshole. Nothing wrong with that either really. Again, he is who he is. I'm something of an asshole too, so who am I to judge?
DuWayne at December 19, 2008 8:21 PM
Brian, by social creatures I mean that a lot of what we think and do is about interacting with our fellow human beings. So spending time with a few good friends counts. I don't like spending time with large groups of people either - it wears me out. I you do have a few people that you feel a connection with, then I retract my comment about being have alive. I had just gotten the impression that you didn't feel connections with anybody.
Chang, where did I say anything about sex???? As far as I could tell from what Brian had said, I didn't believe he had any people close to him. In fact, I agree with him when he said that sex was an insufficient reason to put up with another human in an intimate way. Loving someone and being intimate are the same as having sex. As far a Jesus goes, I don't know if he existed, much less if he had sex or not.
William at December 19, 2008 8:38 PM
I can really understand what Brian is saying. There are too many of us guys that cannot seem to find these girls who just want to hook up for the pure pleasure of it. It warms my heart to know that this is something he and I have in common! We've both given up. It ain't worth the effort to solve it. Seems like he's staying single, and I don't have enough spine to leave a someone who's probably a Montana Ave wannabe (Amy keeps saying "grow a pair", easy to say). He seems to doubt that there are sex loving girls. I believe that they exist, just not in sufficient quantity for all guys to experience them. I believe I've even gotten close to one or two, just couldn't seem to keep them around (life ain't fair). I think Amy has pointed this out before.
BTW: I'm glad he doesn't really hate all of humanity! We should share a beer sometime.
laser plumb bob at December 19, 2008 9:03 PM
I would also like to jump on the sex as essential is a ridiculous concept bandwagon. It's most certainly not, nor does it come close to making us human. Lack of intimacy is really kind of damaging to the psyche, but in itself doesn't make us inhuman. And neither of these things is why I accused brian of being a sociopath.
Its the complete lack of feeling for this lack of intimacy that's the issue.
And such intimacy can be and really usually is found outside of sex. I have very good friends whom I am intimate with. One of my oldest friends hasn't had sex or a romantic relationship in more than fifteen years. But being a really great person and awesome friend, he has never wanted for intimacy in his life. Indeed, being his friend taught me a lot about intimacy.
It could well be that brian has such friendships, if so I apologize for misunderstanding you.
DuWayne at December 19, 2008 9:03 PM
It's not that I don't feel anything ever. In reference to Flynne's comment, I meant that she oughtn't feel bad for me because I feel nothing in regard to intimacy (or lack thereof).
I don't experience emotions the way most people do. Most of the things that pass for "feeling" run through my brain looking for something to connect with, and finding nothing go flitting out into space. My problem isn't that I don't feel, but that I'm missing some piece that allows me to parse complex emotions.
In a way, staying single is an act of consideration. I'll only be wasting some lady's time while she waits for me to pick up on some subtle cue that I'll never notice in a million years. I'll never give her the emotional feedback she wants, because I can't. It's like talking to a dog. Deep down you know that they can't understand a bit of what you're saying.
That disregard is for others in the abstract. What happens to people half a planet away from me is too distant for me to give a damn about. What happens to my father, on the other hand, is of distinct and immediate concern to me.
brian at December 19, 2008 9:31 PM
Close, but not quite. It's not that I can't find them, I'm not looking. I didn't give up, so much as I never tried in the first place.
I'm an engineer. Everything comes down to risk/reward. And since all the rewards of chasing tail are hypothetical, I can't tell if they are worth the very real risks. And when you've already been on the receiving end of the risks without even chasing the tail? Let's just say that it acts as a tremendous impediment to getting dates.
Simpler: Dating is too much like work.
brian at December 19, 2008 9:34 PM
Yes, meeting other people's needs can be terribly inconvenient.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at December 20, 2008 6:17 AM
Hi William! About Ragbrai, you really don't have to register. The only time that's necessary is if you rely on the Des Moines Register support vehicles. Check out www.bikeiowa.com and you can find another group to hook up with. Different "teams" take buses, and will just ask that you chip in for gas and food. I have ridden with Team Hard and the Road Pirates (hence the moniker) before, and it's a lot nicer way to go than dealing with the Register.
Also, you don't have to ride every single day - you can take a day off and "sag" on the bus, and still meet up with the other riders at the halfway town. Especially if you can drive the bus - these teams always appreciate it if someone who wants to take a day off from riding will take a turn at the wheel, so everyone gets a chance to ride.
The route always starts at the westernmost edge of the state and travels east across it, veering north and south quite a bit. The route varies every year, but tends to be in the neighborhood of 500 miles. Daily miles can be anywhere from 55-85 miles.
Pirate Jo at December 20, 2008 7:18 AM
>>I didn't give up, so much as I never tried in the first place...Dating is too much like work.
Brian,
In which case, not even Sally-the-cross-eyed-happy-Christmas-slut is going to bother with you, is she?
It seems to me you're the one pricing yourself too high for any sexual transaction!
Jody Tresidder at December 20, 2008 8:03 AM
The title story reminds me again of an episode of Barney Miller. Capt. Miller's ex-wife comes in, to find a hooker in the hallway outside his office.
Ex: Why are you here?
Hooker: Prostitution.
Ex: I could never sleep with a man for money.
Hooker: Okay. Why are you here?
Ex: To pick up a check.
Moral of the story: Don't pretend anything is free, and you won't be surprised at the costs.
Radwaste at December 20, 2008 8:03 AM
DuWayne, good clarification of the sociopath. I read Dr. Hare's book about it because I suspected my mom to be one, and she is. It's the lack of the ability to feel empathy which makes them different. It is the way they are and people have to accept them that way and not have expectations.
From my experience and from talking to my sex-lovin' friends, women that have sex 'for free' usually expect that the guy will be very attentive to their need for an orgasm (or many orgasms). It's a womans motivation for having sex (which I would assume is the same for a guy?) and a guy that give good oral and actually enjoys it is mandatory for me personally. I've been with guys who were totally selfish in bed and then they were surprised that I didn't want to see them again. Duh!
Chrissy at December 20, 2008 8:35 AM
>>Moral of the story: Don't pretend anything is free, and you won't be surprised at the costs.
More useful cracker barrel moral: once you've figured out everything costs, learn what you value.
Jody Tresidder at December 20, 2008 9:02 AM
"I don't experience emotions the way most people do. Most of the things that pass for "feeling" run through my brain looking for something to connect with, and finding nothing go flitting out into space. My problem isn't that I don't feel, but that I'm missing some piece that allows me to parse complex emotions".
Brian, from reading your comments over many months, I am pretty sure you have Aspergers, like my son. Even your profession fits this profile.
Aspergers is a high-functioning form of autism, which explains why you do not enjoy social interaction - at least face to face. I mean, THIS is a form of social interaction, so you are not really "anti-social". Those with Aspergers are usually drawn to computers. You just don't enjoy the in-person sort of interaction. I'm guessing you don't like to make eye contact and have trouble picking up on social cues.
There are support groups you might find helpful...maybe you'd even meet a woman like you. :)
lovelysoul at December 20, 2008 9:16 AM
I loves me some Tresidder today. (It still looks better with two s's.) Can sociopathy have a better definition than describing others as 'abstractions' and "background noise"?
> once you've figured out everything
> costs, learn what you value.
With every day, the word "value" becomes more important to me. Not in the talkradio conservative sense of 'values', but in the sense of wealth, and what wealth means to people.
I was talking with one of the most beautiful women in my life this morning, an unrepentant liberal. She was complaining about health care costs, and I was suggesting that prices will never go lower until patients are asked what they want to pay for things, and she wouldn't take the point.
Lots of people want medicine to be this trans-human voodoo realm where economics just aren't a factor... As if somehow, from outside the arena (or the hospital), there's a policy that can suspend these universal principles, so that value will just appear like magic in the patient's pocket.
In short, they want to be precious about it. They want to not have to worry about money when they're sick.
Well, what happens when people are precious about things is that other people --who don't feel that preciousness-- do what they want to do anyway.
You may think the freeway overpass looks best without markings. But the punk kid without a car feels no preciousness about it, and so it gets grafitti-ed.
You may think your cancer-ridden grandmother deserves a little drink of water. But the hospital feels no special preciousness about her thirst, and so when she checks out (or dies) there's a $7.50 charge on her bill.
It'll probably be good water, though.
I'm just babbling because it's the weekend, the shopping's done, and despite all the problems there's much to be grateful for. So let's keep going. Before clicking on the following link, please complete this quiz:
What's the most exciting innovation to come out of General Motors in the last 30 years? (check one:)
[ ] A. Saturn
[ ] B. GMAC
If you answered B, you'll probably enjoy this from McCardle.
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at December 20, 2008 9:29 AM
A. This Ion went 212.684 mph. Yes, on four cylinders and front-wheel drive.
Radwaste at December 20, 2008 10:17 AM
"Can sociopathy have a better definition than describing others as 'abstractions' and "background noise"?"
I know one person who I believe is a sociopath, and she may very well be the most socially needy person I know. What this adds up to is someone who is determined to bludgeon her way into social situations, and then shit upon everyone. Not so much because she intends to shit upon people, but because she will simply do whatever she thinks will bring her the most benefit and attention, without any regard whatsoever for the consequences of her actions upon other people.
If, for example, spreading a vicious and untrue rumor about someone will make her the center of attention in a conversation for five minutes, she will do it, even without regard for the fact that it will come back and bite her in the ass later. Later, she seems genuinely surprised when everyone ends up hating her. I can never tell if she's really that stupid, or just playing stupid. It does seem that some disorder may be at work.
Brian seems more like an introvert to me.
Pirate Jo at December 20, 2008 10:21 AM
> Yes, on four cylinders and
> front-wheel drive.
No-haggle pricing?
Crid [cridcridatgmail] at December 20, 2008 10:41 AM
>>I loves me some Tresidder today
Actually I did notice, Crid...and it makes the back of my neck prickle.
(Btw, your hunch was right. The folksy 'snot-doorknob' thing on the other thread was from Arkansas).
Jody Tresidder at December 20, 2008 11:02 AM
personally i have no problem with prostitution. it would probably work better if it were legalized. that being said, i totally understand where this girl is coming from. i struggled financially while in college. i did have someone proposition me to be a benefactor but i just couldn't do it. sex for love i can do, sex for money i cannot. but to each his/her own. if she can then props to her.
sharifa at December 20, 2008 3:34 PM
in the article it said she waited 3 months to have sex with him, I call bull shit on that. If a man is paying for it, why would he wait that long. I'm a woman, I would never pay for sex (don't need to ;) ) and I wouldn't wait 3 months. I have no problem with prostitution and think it should be legalized but I find women who are prostitutes, like this situation or the one Amy mentioned, and they say they arent actually prostitutes are ridiculous and only deluding themselves. You're a sex worker, just admit it, why try to class it up. At least the women working the streets are honest about it.
Nina at December 20, 2008 4:35 PM
To choose to have 3 kids and have your "job" be raising them means that you have chosen to be dependent on him, whether or not you see it that way.
TheOtherOne at December 20, 2008 6:35 PM
Nobody can prepare for every eventuality, The OtherOne. Look at all the skilled, educated people losing jobs in this economy. Look at all the responsible savers and investors who've lost much of their retirement with the stock market collapse. Look at all the intelligent people ripped off by Madoff.
What bugs me is how so many of you complain about the screwed up kids we have out there - the messed up society - while at the same time criticizing someone like momof3 for choosing to stay at home and make it her job to raise her children properly, just because this makes her "dependent" on someone else.
Life is full of risks. We try to hedge our bets, as best we can, against all sorts of scenarios, but in the end, we're ALL vulnerable to bad luck and unforeseen circumstances.
And I think it's far more noble to take that gamble for the sake of your children than for many other reasons.
lovelysoul at December 20, 2008 7:06 PM
I wonder why nobody considers that what he is paying her for is not the "attention" he does get from her but the "attention" he doesn't get?
gwallan at December 20, 2008 9:10 PM
gwalian:
Wasn't it Charlie Sheen who explained that he didn't pay hookers for sex, he paid them so they would leave?
GaryC at December 21, 2008 2:15 AM
So, telling someone who has claimed to not be dependent on the guy who brings home the check that she really is in fact dependent, whether she wants to admit it or not, is criticizing her?
I didn't question her choices - just her claims that she was prepared for eventualities and that she wasn't dependent.
And, by the way, I didn't say a word about "messed up kids out there", much less at the same time as pointing out her dependence.
TheOtherOne at December 21, 2008 6:04 AM
Well, it seems to me that momof3 is as prepared for eventualities as she could be...as most of us could be. At least she does have insurance, and she's never said she was uneducated, just that returning to the work force after raising kids would likely require starting at an entry level position.
My point is that those of you who stress "independence" act as if you have prepared for all eventualities too, and therefore will never need to be dependent on anyone ever again. Yet, whether you realize it or not, you are also dependent - on the financial system, on the world food markets, on the value of the dollar.
Are you prepared for a food shortage? Are you prepared for the dollar inevitably losing much of its buying power over the next decade? You should be.
Putting momof3 down for what you perceive is a lack of preparation is unfair. What she does is a job - not a "job" in quotations but a real JOB.
It sounds like she and her husband are working towards a financial goal and have done well. Two people can make a very effective team - with one at work and at one at home raising the kids. Many of the richest people in the world built their wealth with that sort of arrangement.
So don't assume that momof3 will be the one to end up "dependent".
lovelysoul at December 21, 2008 6:45 AM
Legally, I'm not dependant. And he is equally dependent on me to care for the kids he made. If I chose not to, he'd be paying out the ass for someone else to. Check the texas laws. I have a BA and am working on an MA. Neither uneducated nor unqualified. Realistic, in that I know when I go back to work, I will not be entering at the level I would have been at had I worked through.
Also, spouses who give up a career are entitled to alimony in texas, community-property state or no. One should always know one's rights. They can be surprising.
We have disability insurance, only idiots don't. I also have life insurance on me, which many SAHMs don't have but should. It would actually cost him just as much to replace me as me him.
Daycares and daycare workers, and nannies, don't really give a crap about kids growing up moral or even intelligent. They care about their jobs, and may care for individual kids. Yet they will never have that investment in those kids the parents have. Yet so many think that working while paying these substandard caregivers is the way to go? Again, why have kids? When was the last time you saw a college educated daycare worker?
I have a friend who complains she never sees her kids, and she's not far from wrong. She "has" to work. Cause they "had" to buy that 3500 sq ft house last month. She has to drive a $50k SUV. "Has" to. Apparently what she doesn't have to do is raise the kids she bore. And people think she's smart.
momof3 at December 21, 2008 11:30 AM
Brian's not a sociopath, or at least doesn't seem to be from his posts. He cares about some people, the rest are background noise. Most of us feel this way. Some have larger circles, some smaller. But do you REALLY care about the starving kids in Africa? Why aren't you doing something about it?
Sociopaths care for NO one but themselves, and see all people as equally unreal.
momof3 at December 21, 2008 11:54 AM
"I have a friend who complains she never sees her kids, and she's not far from wrong. She "has" to work. Cause they "had" to buy that 3500 sq ft house last month. She has to drive a $50k SUV. "Has" to. Apparently what she doesn't have to do is raise the kids she bore. And people think she's smart".
Amen to that, momof3. I may disagree with you on certain things, but what you are doing is very important in my view. A lot of people fail to realize that the time you put into your kids is an investment, just like any other, or perhaps more. It pays real dividends.
I have several friends who are now dealing with their very dependent elder parents. So, the emotional bonds you create with your children pays a huge dividend in the long run. Throughout the ages, that has been the way to avoid dependency on government - the time invested in the younger generation, especially their education, pays huge dividends in your children's ability to care for you as you inevitably become older and more dependent.
Almost no one is totally independent for life. If you choose to have no children, then you best make sure you have long-term care insurance, and most likely, you will still end up dependent on the government (all of us taxpayers) for the bulk of your elder care.
In my opinion, taking a few years to be "dependent" in order to bond with your children, as well as insure their success in life, is a very worthy investment, momof3. Good for you.
lovelysoul at December 21, 2008 1:53 PM
Brian's not a sociopath, or at least doesn't seem to be from his posts. He cares about some people, the rest are background noise.
First evidence I have seen of that is in this thread.
But do you REALLY care about the starving kids in Africa? Why aren't you doing something about it?
Yes, as a matter of fact I do. And I send money (when I am able) through Nazarene missions. My old band also played several benefits, for several charitable organizations.
I actually have a serious problem with this and even more with the violence that is fairly extreme across the continent. I have worked very hard to learn to compartmentalize, because I have children to raise and need to consider my health. The genocide in Darfur, in particular, set me off badly. After reading a particularly poignant story, I had trouble sleeping (as a insomniac, at best I sleep four hours a night, usually closer to two and a half) and my ulcer had me puking and crapping blood.
I have always had a problem with internalizing the problems of others, whether they are problems I am able to affect or not.
DuWayne at December 21, 2008 3:51 PM
Rich sugar daddy seeking for young and beautiful woman are quite common, it's now very popular in Canada, Australia, US,UK. Actually, dating a sugar babies can bring both a lot of benefits, there is no commitment.
stevegaga at February 14, 2017 10:53 PM
Leave a comment