NYT's recent article on sugar-daddy situations arranged on-line, makes for very interesting reading. A woman who has had multiple sugar-daddies has the following to say about the choice she has made :
“I could go out and work three jobs and still go to school and probably make decent grades, but is that really what I want to do? I make more money this way, and I have a lot more fun because I get to go out to concerts, go shopping, see movies and make money off of it. If instead of this I was just dating a rich guy, it’d be almost the same thing, and society wouldn’t look down on that. You know with a sugar daddy that they’re spending a lot of money on you and they clearly want something in return, but is that really any different than how it is with a boyfriend?”
It is actually hard to argue with that line of reasoning. The modern day romantic relationship is not as much about courtship or romance as it is about physical intimacy which serves as a proxy for the more durable (and therefore harder to come by) true emotional connection.
Then there is the sugar-daddy's rationale for doing what he does. The article cites the example of one of them as follows :
He has an almost mathematical approach to assessing relationships, and once even computed the costs for a girlfriend, mistress, prostitute and wife — mistresses turn out to be most expensive by the hour; wives, by the year; girlfriends are cheapest all around. But he’s not as calculating as he seems. In fact, he concluded there’s little correlation between cost and quality. Still, he is relentlessly searching for an algorithm that will predict relationships’ success.
The only way to reclaim modern day relationships that have like everything else fallen prey to monetization and commoditization, seems to be to revive the element of pure romance in it once again. It does seem like a truly sad state of affairs when it hard to tell dating apart from prostitution, because from a woman's perspective they don't feel all that different. It makes perfect sense then for a man to calculate costs for different relationship modes and choose the one that offers him the best return on investment.
“I could go out and work three jobs and still go to school and probably make decent grades, but is that really what I want to do? I make more money this way, and I have a lot more fun because I get to go out to concerts, go shopping, see movies and make money off of it. If instead of this I was just dating a rich guy, it’d be almost the same thing, and society wouldn’t look down on that. You know with a sugar daddy that they’re spending a lot of money on you and they clearly want something in return, but is that really any different than how it is with a boyfriend?”
It is actually hard to argue with that line of reasoning. The modern day romantic relationship is not as much about courtship or romance as it is about physical intimacy which serves as a proxy for the more durable (and therefore harder to come by) true emotional connection.
Then there is the sugar-daddy's rationale for doing what he does. The article cites the example of one of them as follows :
He has an almost mathematical approach to assessing relationships, and once even computed the costs for a girlfriend, mistress, prostitute and wife — mistresses turn out to be most expensive by the hour; wives, by the year; girlfriends are cheapest all around. But he’s not as calculating as he seems. In fact, he concluded there’s little correlation between cost and quality. Still, he is relentlessly searching for an algorithm that will predict relationships’ success.
The only way to reclaim modern day relationships that have like everything else fallen prey to monetization and commoditization, seems to be to revive the element of pure romance in it once again. It does seem like a truly sad state of affairs when it hard to tell dating apart from prostitution, because from a woman's perspective they don't feel all that different. It makes perfect sense then for a man to calculate costs for different relationship modes and choose the one that offers him the best return on investment.
Comments
Don't know whether to laugh or cry. Sad state of affairs (pun intended). This is what happens when 'logic' enters every and any phase of relationships. Anything can be justified by 'logic'. One can ask "What's wrong with this?" ad infinitum on anything.
In my mind, anyone who brings dry logic to situations that the heart cannot accept, is at best seriously mixed-up and at worst a crook. My father used to quote a saint, who said the following: "Without cultivating qualities like love, devotion and sacrifice - if one, through education grows only the intellect - then this intellect will serve him to commit dishonest deeds and invent clever justifications to escape the consequences of the same".
Definitely something to ponder when someone brings dry logic and you find yourself thinking "Something is missing here..." without being able to put a finger on what. What is missing is consideration, and a heart. Of course the purveyors of logic will scoff at both notions.
Priya.