I read an article on the BBC Newsbeat website the other day about female students that use sugar daddy apps to find men, most likely older, that are prepared to help fund them through university, possibly in return for sexual favours.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/35521859/a-quarter-of-a-million-uk-students-now-using-sugar-daddies-according-to-app
The introduction of tuition fees has clearly resulted in some unexpected social change…
…and the mind boggles. This topic has taken my thoughts off in some conflicting directions. Does this development equate to philanthropy or prostitution?
Philanthropy
It could be argued that the sugar daddy (SD) is stepping up to the challenge of educational funding created by the government with its miserly, misinformed (in my opinion) view of the value to society/the UK of higher ed. The imposition of tuition fees has marginalised the less wealthy in society and a new funding model has appeared to fill the void.
But sugar daddy philanthropy is unlikely to get a fellow on to the New Year’s Honours List!
Prostitution
Of course the nature of money exchanging hands for sexual favours has been long known as prostitution. Is the SD market just a new variation on the theme? Well ‘yes’ for obvious reasons but maybe ‘not quite’ for others.
So is this development perhaps better considered in terms of entrepreneurialism or exploitation?
Entrepreneurialism
Maybe it’s more like plain entrepreneurialism? We are in a capitalist society, a market has become visible and the sugar daddy/student have formed a joint venture to meet the market requirements – there is investment and there is return on investment. For the SD there is the pleasure of knowing that he has helped a youngster gain a degree (and quite possibly the pleasure associated with the occasional blow job or other sexual favour). For the student, there is value in having a reduced college related debt burden (or cash, accommodation and stuff) and the knowledge that they have no doubt made an older man very happy.
Exploitation
Have rich blokes just found another way to exploit their wealth to take advantage of young, impressionable women? Or are young women exploiting their bodies to take advantage of the wallets of wealthy and silly men?
Could be either or neither - if there are mutual benefits and there is consent, arguably, there’s no exploitation.
So is this social development a good or a bad thing? That’s the six million dollar question.
Or maybe not quite as much as that.
Funding kids through university, with £9,000 a year tuition fees on top of the cost of accommodation and other living expenses, is probably a sleep loser for many parents. How will they ever be able to retire; will their children will leave higher education saddled with huge debts despite their best efforts. A £50,000 question perhaps?
Going to university inevitably involves a bit of sleeping around and having an older person in the mix with a big wallet might not be such a bad thing for one’s offspring.
A good development then?
Well no not really. From a personal perspective, the thought of my daughter part funding herself through uni by sleeping with old/wealthy men is horrible.
So what does that mean for me?
Retirement is for wimps, I’ll work until I drop, I’ll spend the next decade a lot less than wealthy, and I’ll try not to think about how many sexual favours I could have earned if I funded someone else’s children through university instead of my own.
A less than wealthy father - that probably makes me a Sugar Free Daddy! I don’t suppose there will be an app for my type.
And when it comes to favours, I’ll just take whatever Mrs Baldwin is prepared to bestow.
Blog Home
Blog Library
Home
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/35521859/a-quarter-of-a-million-uk-students-now-using-sugar-daddies-according-to-app
The introduction of tuition fees has clearly resulted in some unexpected social change…
…and the mind boggles. This topic has taken my thoughts off in some conflicting directions. Does this development equate to philanthropy or prostitution?
Philanthropy
It could be argued that the sugar daddy (SD) is stepping up to the challenge of educational funding created by the government with its miserly, misinformed (in my opinion) view of the value to society/the UK of higher ed. The imposition of tuition fees has marginalised the less wealthy in society and a new funding model has appeared to fill the void.
But sugar daddy philanthropy is unlikely to get a fellow on to the New Year’s Honours List!
Prostitution
Of course the nature of money exchanging hands for sexual favours has been long known as prostitution. Is the SD market just a new variation on the theme? Well ‘yes’ for obvious reasons but maybe ‘not quite’ for others.
- The older man funding a younger woman is more like a master/mistress relationship than a hooker/punter.
- Also, if the BBC piece is to be believed, the funding/sex link might not be a given. And I suspect that a prostitute is rarely paid for not bestowing sexual favours.
- The typical hooker/punter relationship must surely be short term in nature, unlike a SD set up that could last for three/four years and maybe even longer.
So is this development perhaps better considered in terms of entrepreneurialism or exploitation?
Entrepreneurialism
Maybe it’s more like plain entrepreneurialism? We are in a capitalist society, a market has become visible and the sugar daddy/student have formed a joint venture to meet the market requirements – there is investment and there is return on investment. For the SD there is the pleasure of knowing that he has helped a youngster gain a degree (and quite possibly the pleasure associated with the occasional blow job or other sexual favour). For the student, there is value in having a reduced college related debt burden (or cash, accommodation and stuff) and the knowledge that they have no doubt made an older man very happy.
Exploitation
Have rich blokes just found another way to exploit their wealth to take advantage of young, impressionable women? Or are young women exploiting their bodies to take advantage of the wallets of wealthy and silly men?
Could be either or neither - if there are mutual benefits and there is consent, arguably, there’s no exploitation.
So is this social development a good or a bad thing? That’s the six million dollar question.
Or maybe not quite as much as that.
Funding kids through university, with £9,000 a year tuition fees on top of the cost of accommodation and other living expenses, is probably a sleep loser for many parents. How will they ever be able to retire; will their children will leave higher education saddled with huge debts despite their best efforts. A £50,000 question perhaps?
Going to university inevitably involves a bit of sleeping around and having an older person in the mix with a big wallet might not be such a bad thing for one’s offspring.
A good development then?
Well no not really. From a personal perspective, the thought of my daughter part funding herself through uni by sleeping with old/wealthy men is horrible.
So what does that mean for me?
Retirement is for wimps, I’ll work until I drop, I’ll spend the next decade a lot less than wealthy, and I’ll try not to think about how many sexual favours I could have earned if I funded someone else’s children through university instead of my own.
A less than wealthy father - that probably makes me a Sugar Free Daddy! I don’t suppose there will be an app for my type.
And when it comes to favours, I’ll just take whatever Mrs Baldwin is prepared to bestow.
Blog Home
Blog Library
Home
RSS Feed
