Sugar daddy site: It’s better than sex work!

SeekingArrangements.com wants you to know that you'll make more as a sugar baby than a prostitute

Topics: Sex Work, Sex, Love and Sex,

Sugar daddy site: It's better than sex work! (Credit: Shots Studio via Shutterstock)

Ever wondered which is more lucrative, being a prostitute or a sugar baby? Well, SeekingArrangement.com, the dating site for those seeking “Mutually Beneficial Relationships®,” has decided to answer that question — in a completely scientific and unbiased way, I’m sure.

In a new report, the company has determined that “in order for a prostitute to earn as much as a Sugar Baby, she would need to put in 25x the effort, and put herself at a serious risk of personal safety and mental and physical health,” according to a press release. Seeking Arrangements makes the following calculations: “The average Sugar Baby dates one to three men annually, receiving an average yearly allowance of approximately $36,000. If a prostitute makes on average $250 per transaction, she would have to have sex with presumably 100 men, performing over 144 sexual transactions.”

OK, where do we start? There’s the simple problem of grouping together all forms of prostitution — or all forms of prostitution that don’t take place on SeekingArrangements.com — when the services, transaction fees, forms of payment, workers, clientele and associated threat of violence can vary greatly. Then there’s the fact that the sugar baby income is based on not only cash handed over but expenses paid (which could include expensive dinners sat through with pretty undesirable company). Calculating the cost/benefit of such things is more complicated, and individual, than Seeking Arrangements suggests — and maybe, just maybe, better trusted to more objective researchers.

Sarah Elspeth Patterson, founding organizer of Persist Health Project, a health organization supporting sex workers, takes issue with the report’s claim that “having sex with strangers puts a prostitute at a great risk of contracting a sexually transmitted disease or infection.” Patterson explains, “Having sex with strangers does not put people in the sex trade at any greater risk of contracting a sexually transmitted disease or infection than the general population” — although having a greater number of partners in general does increase the associated STI risk – and she notes that prostitutes are often very familiar with safer sex practices as their jobs depend on it. And in response to the press release’s claim that sex workers are at greater risk of violence, Patterson argues that “harmful laws expose sex trade workers to victimization, through both sexual and physical violence, as well as the institutional violence of being afraid to talk to medical professions about their experience or report an assault to the police.”

You Might Also Like

But to the real point of Seeking Arrangement’s press release: The company is attempting to not-so-subtly distance itself from the vast spectrum of sex-for-money services that we sometimes call prostitution. The press release email’s subject line? “Sugar Babies are Not Whores.” It certainly isn’t the first time the company’s tried this, but it is perhaps its most blatant attempt at marketing itself for these recessionary times. (Next, I fully expect to see Seeking Arrangements showing up at college job fairs.) Patterson isn’t surprised by the attempt to banish the p-word: ”The term ‘prostitution’ is very historically loaded and the behaviors that fall within that category are varied and diverse,” she says. “Being involved in sexual exchange for money, goods or services is very specific to the person who is engaging in it and can only truly be defined by their individual experience.”

Tracy Clark-Flory
Tracy Clark-Flory is a staff writer at Salon. Follow @tracyclarkflory on Twitter and Facebook.

More Related Stories

Featured Slide Shows

  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on Facebook
  • 1 of 8
  • Close
  • Fullscreen
  • Thumbnails
    Sonic

    7 ways Americans have defiled the hot dog

    Sonic's Bacon Double Cheddar Croissant Dog

    Sonic calls this a "gourmet twist" on a classic. I am not so, so fancy, but I know that sprinkling bacon and cheddar cheese onto a tube of pork is not gourmet, even if you have made a bun out of something that is theoretically French.

    Krispy Kreme

    7 ways Americans have defiled the hot dog

    Krispy Kreme's Doughnut Dog

    This stupid thing is a hotdog in a glazed doughnut bun, topped with bacon and raspberry jelly. It is only available at Delaware's Frawley Stadium, thank god.

    KFC

    7 ways Americans have defiled the hot dog

    KFC's Double Down Dog

    This creation is notable for its fried chicken bun and ability to hastily kill your dreams.

    Pizza Hut

    7 ways Americans have defiled the hot dog

    Pizza Hut's Hot Dog Bites Pizza

    Pizza Hut basically just glued pigs-in-blankets to the crust of its normal pizza. This actually sounds good, and I blame America for brainwashing me into feeling that.

    Carl's Jr.

    7 ways Americans have defiled the hot dog

    Carl's Jr. Most American Thick Burger

    This is a burger stuffed with potato chips and hot dogs. Choose a meat, America! How hard is it to just choose a meat?!

    Tokyo Dog

    7 ways Americans have defiled the hot dog

    Tokyo Dog's Juuni Ban

    A food truck in Seattle called Tokyo Dog created this thing, which is notable for its distinction as the Guinness Book of World Records' most expensive hot dog at $169. It is a smoked cheese bratwurst, covered in butter Teriyaki grilled onions, Maitake mushrooms, Wagyu beef, foie gras, black truffles, caviar and Japanese mayo in a brioche bun. Just calm down, Tokyo Dog. Calm down.

    Interscope

    7 ways Americans have defiled the hot dog

    Limp Bizkit's "Chocolate Starfish and the Hot Dog Flavored Water"

    This album art should be illegal.

  • Recent Slide Shows

Comments

0 Comments

Comment Preview

Your name will appear as username ( settings | log out )

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href=""> <b> <em> <strong> <i> <blockquote>