The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

How is this not prostitution?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/35521859/a-quarter-of-a-million-uk-students-now-using-sugar-daddies-according-to-app

It's prostitution.

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
Avatar for al_94
al_94
14
Sugar babies are prostitutes if they sleep with them they are being paid to go with these rich old men and a lot of them are married which makes it even worse
Reply 2
Avatar for Tom.x.Gotze
Tom.x.Gotze
OP
1
Original post by al_94
Sugar babies are prostitutes if they sleep with them [and] they are being paid to go with these rich old men and a lot of them are married which makes it even worse


Precisely.
Reply 3
Avatar for Tom.x.Gotze
Tom.x.Gotze
OP
1
I feel like not using the term "prostitution" trivialises the whole industry and open people to a lot more risk to their safety than is otherwise necessary. Attaching the stigma is good imo as it deters more people from getting involved in what can be quite a dangerous business.
Reply 4
Avatar for Aj12
Aj12
18
Original post by Tom.x.Gotze


The girls themselves seem to see it more as companionship they are selling and not all of them will have sex with the men involved. Even if it is prostitution (and the line is pretty thin) that is legal in the UK. I guess calling yourself a sugar baby sounds better than a hooker?
Reply 5
Avatar for Tom.x.Gotze
Tom.x.Gotze
OP
1
Original post by Aj12
The girls themselves seem to see it more as companionship they are selling and not all of them will have sex with the men involved. Even if it is prostitution (and the line is pretty thin) that is legal in the UK. I guess calling yourself a sugar baby sounds better than a hooker?


Yup, only thing that is not legal is brothels and if i remember correctly from my studies (several years ago now)... soliciting.

I don't know, i think the "prostitute" label has a stigma that serves as a good deterrent so that this type of socially damaging practise is minimalised.
Of course the vast majority of 'sugar' 'relationships' are prostitution. The number of people willing to pay strangers large sums without expecting a sexual aspect is very small.

As such the usual rules apply: cash up front, think about your boundaries, and take care of your privacy.
Reply 7
Avatar for Aj12
Aj12
18
Original post by Tom.x.Gotze
Yup, only thing that is not legal is brothels and if i remember correctly from my studies (several years ago now)... soliciting.

I don't know, i think the "prostitute" label has a stigma that serves as a good deterrent so that this type of socially damaging practise is minimalised.


Provided no coercion is involved too, even if the client is not aware of said coercion.

Maybe, but then how is this socially damaging? The women (do men ever do this?) are choosing to do it, they set the boundaries and decide how far it goes. Whilst perhaps putting themselves at some risk you could say the same is true of some one online dating.

Those involved will have an easier time defining what it is they are doing, you can choose to call it prostitution if you wish, but I don't think it will have much impact when all involved offer their own euphemisms.
Original post by Tom.x.Gotze
Yup, only thing that is not legal is brothels and if i remember correctly from my studies (several years ago now)... soliciting.

I don't know, i think the "prostitute" label has a stigma that serves as a good deterrent so that this type of socially damaging practise is minimalised.


In England and Wales..

Working in and visiting a brothel is legal, but owning / running / allowing one isn't.

It's illegal to control someone else's prostitution for gain - this translates doing things like running a brothel (again) or escort agency. Inciting prostitution for gain is also illegal and this is what caught the prick who was advertising an agency for sugar-style relationships, but was just shagging applicants before telling them that they weren't good enough for his imaginary clients.

As a prostitute, just about the only thing that's illegal is soliciting - looking for clients in person on the street or similar public space.
Original post by Aj12
Provided no coercion is involved too, even if the client is not aware of said coercion.


Oh yes, I was forgetting this bit. As there seem to have been no prosecutions and it was gesture politics that got it passed, it looks like everyone else has forgotten it too.

The women (do men ever do this?)


Yes, they do. The vast number of clients for both are men.

Those involved will have an easier time defining what it is they are doing, you can choose to call it prostitution if you wish, but I don't think it will have much impact when all involved offer their own euphemisms.


The problem with euphemisms is that it can conceal from those involved what's going on.

So there are plenty of potential 'sugar babies' who fall for the 'before I give you any of my imaginary millions, I have to be sure that you're right for me... drop 'em' con. If they were more realistic about it being sex for cash prostitution, that would happen less.

Similarly, fewer clients would be less of a pain if they acknowledged that it was prostitution and not a relationship.
Original post by Aj12
Provided no coercion is involved too, even if the client is not aware of said coercion.

Maybe, but then how is this socially damaging? The women (do men ever do this?) are choosing to do it, they set the boundaries and decide how far it goes. Whilst perhaps putting themselves at some risk you could say the same is true of some one online dating.

Those involved will have an easier time defining what it is they are doing, you can choose to call it prostitution if you wish, but I don't think it will have much impact when all involved offer their own euphemisms.


1. Possibility of underaged girls
2. Men who pay and then feel entitled to ownership and violence when met with "no".
Original post by Tom.x.Gotze
1. Possibility of underaged girls
2. Men who pay and then feel entitled to ownership and violence when met with "no".


Both of those risks come with general sex and dating and just so much as having contact with other human beings as well. They're not exclusive to prostitution. That's a problem with under-age people having sex and some people not taking no for an answer regardless of whether friend, girlfriend, wife, stranger or prostitute.

So not really a good argument against prostitution, so much as an argument against violence, rape and under-age sex.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by SophieSmall
Both of those risks come with general sex and dating. They're not exclusive to prostitution. That's a problem with under-age people having sex and that some people not taking no for an answer regardless of whether friend, girlfriend, wife, stranger or prostitute.

So not really a good argument against prostitution.


Why increase the risk though by giving a good platform for people to exploit?
The good of prostitution does not outweigh the possible bad.
Original post by Tom.x.Gotze


damn straight it is.
Original post by Tom.x.Gotze
Why increase the risk though by giving a good platform for people to exploit?
The good of prostitution does not outweigh the possible bad.


You could argue the same for relationships. You are far more likely to be raped by your partner, yet people don't say don't get into relationships it increases your risk.

The second sentence is just your opinion. There is not at the moment anyway a definitive answer. I have no strong stance either way, I'm looking at it from both sides of the fence.
Original post by Tom.x.Gotze
Why increase the risk though by giving a good platform for people to exploit?
The good of prostitution does not outweigh the possible bad.


Like dating sites? As the user above says, there is no inherent risk to being a sugar baby that doesn't come with casual sex in general.
Original post by SophieSmall
You could argue the same for relationships. You are far more likely to be raped by your partner, yet people don't say don't get into relationships it increases your risk.

The second sentence is just your opinion. There is not at the moment anyway a definitive answer. I have no strong stance either way, I'm looking at it from both sides of the fence.



Meh, I do have a strong stance on it, I think its distasteful.
Original post by Tom.x.Gotze
Meh, I do have a strong stance on it, I think its distasteful.


Why? For what reasons exclusive to prostitution?
Come on Cambridge, I thought you would be at the top...

Spoiler

A sugar baby who doesn't have sex with the old pervy man is still less of a prostitute than those sluts that open their legs to anyone for free. Why don't you complain about them? :smile:

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you