"Sugarbabies" / "Arrangements" Amateurs or Not?

I have only had sex on the initial M&G when I am using my out of town approach, and then the initial meeting is usually drinks, dinner and an hour or more of conversation, with the expressly stated promise that if one of us is not feeling the magic, the plug is pulled, no questions asked. This has happened only once to me, which is not to say I haven't struck out a couple of times on the road, even after all due diligence was taken in the email run-up to the main event. But as I discovered when I thought about it, my meeting-to-landing ratio is pretty good, probably because I try and screen heavily before we even get to the M&G stage.

When I am operating from my home pond, however, I never expect or really even try to achieve anything at the first meeting other than to determine a rapport, or not, as is sometimes the case. If it happened, I would not refuse, however. Who would?

Scott

[QUOTE=AliasSM; 1432466]All of the sudden, I now totally understand what this SA thing is all about. I may be a member for life.

Alias[/QUOTE]We will be holding the initiation ceremony this Saturday night.

[QUOTE=AliasSM; 1432466]played touchy / feely on the bed and before long the clothes were on the floor and she was well into the game.

Keep the faith my brothers. There are some good fishes in the sea.

Alias[/QUOTE]All hail brother Alias. Behold his SB success. Way to tear it up my man!

SubCmdr Out

Brothers,

I have been talking off-thread with one of our own, and he and I have hit upon a possible sub-set of babies that we both have encountered who apparently are not looking for a long-term situation, but really just like to have sex and get a little sugar.

Our supposition is that they are not getting what they want from the boys their own age, and perhaps would feel a little inhibited in any event with members of their peer group if it got out, for example, that they have a thing for getting tied up, whereas with an SD, they can indulge their fantasies, (and ours) with someone who might have a trick or two up our own sleeves.

For example, my naughty Brit has been ringing the booty bell something fierce the past two weeks, and I am scheduled to answer the call tomorrow afternoon. She is not what I would call a regular for me, and I know for a fact that she is communicating with at least one other of you at the moment as well, so clearly she is not thinking of me as her "steady." I also know for a fact that she loves sex, and lots of it (I'm a little tired all of the sudden just thinking about our last get-together) , so what are we to make of this?

Mandy, I know this is not how you roll, but maybe you are in touch with some sisters that feel this way and could fill us in on the mind-set behind the behavior. If other of the brethren have experienced babies such as these, let's hear your thoughts. I want to make a distinction at the start that these must not be moonlighting pros. We all know what the motivation is there. To qualify, they must be true SBs, amateur status, but not interested in a long-term arrangement. Also, again to qualify for the survey I think you must have wrestled with them more than once.

If it turns out to be a large-enough subset, what do we call them? TSBs, thrill seeking babies; SSBs, sex seeking babies? Just some ideas.

Scott

Amateur staus Scotty means that these "SDs" do not accept money for the pleasure of their company. Therefore these horndog-ettes are pros, albeit relatively low volume compared to a girl who has an escort website, ad on BP or walks the street.

I had the pleasure of exercising with two ladies (MILFS) in the past who were sex maniacs (MHDs =MILF horndogs) and wore little nando out. They did not take any $$$ but allowed me to pay for the room and extras. They were true amateurs. I believe this board referenced a class of providers named tweeners and there is a forum dedicated to them above. These are gals who need some help but are not quite in the escort category. Perhaps the difference I sense with this new set of HCHDs (hot college horndogs) is the level of education involved as opposed to the Nando 1 desperadas.

Perhaps Mandy can opine about this phenom as well, but I believe a large subset of young women nowadays embrace their sexuality much as men do and have for years. Sexual pleasure in and of itself is important to them rather than relationships. Such as going to college and getting their MRS Degree (landing a husband and selltling in to the American Dream of house in suburbia. 2.2 kids, minivan in the driveway, and a husband who brings home the bacon.) Interestingly a female colleague told me today that her Asian friends (who live in Asia) have a gentility and respect about them and a dedication to marriage, their elders, family, and home. But that their "Americanized " younger girl friends, often children of these older ladies, have an arrogance and a total disrespect for those institutions. In other words they are egotistic, indulged, and into what they want. Just sayin '

I would agree with Nando about girls my age and younger embracing their sexuality more than women of past generation. We do want pleasure and enjoyment more and don't necessarily need a relationship for that to occur. Additionally, we're much more curious and willing to try new things. I started exploring swinging and being a submissive when I was only 20, simply because I was curious.

For Scotts question though, I wouldn't say that they aren't any different of a classification of a sugar baby than I am. But rather just another example of how "every sugar arrangement is different." I'll admit I've gone down this route when I've been in my periods of searching for a new SD. The situation goes like this: We meet, there's a bit of physical attraction, in my head I know it's not the long-term thing I want, but I also know they'll be a fun toy for a little bit. We'll meet a couple of times before I'm bored, at the same time I keep looking, when I find someone knew or get bored then it's time to move on. I would actually say that for many of you, these SB's would be better for your "regular world" as they manage to keep it an NSA relationship.

I've only had one of those where sugar was given at the end of each evening and I'll admit that for me personally, I felt like it bordered on the escort side and I had a hard time with that stigma in my head. I actually spent quite a bit of time talking with the hobbyists that follow me on twitter trying to figure out what the differences between the two worlds are.

My question would be this: Are these girls just seeing someone once and then bub bye, or does it come across more as seeing someone occasionally (less than a regular SB) and more like a FWB and the benefit to her is a little sugar? If it's just the once, then she's a Pro.

And for more on the conversation about is sugar the same as prostitution listen to the callers after my interview. The interview was fun, but the hosts did call me a prostitute when they transitioned from the interview to talking callers. However, after seeing my remark about that on twitter the DJ just responded saying they did it to "Warm up the phones". Oh, and for the anonymity piece of this, they referred to me as Chrissy throughout the interview. Have fun listening [url]http://www.97xonline.com/Player/101351851/[/url]

Congratulations Chrissy / Mandy! The interview went well and you sounded so adorable and smart.

The thing about Sugar is that recipients come in three carnations IMHO. 1) Sexual babies and 2) financial babies and 3) relationship babies, or a mix.

1) Life is never totally simplistic but sexual babies like Mandy are girls who flat out love sex and perhaps need a lot of sex and are not able to be satisfied by one partner. That one partner might be an inadequate performer. Or high volume sex with only one partner gets boring after the first week / month or whatever. These Babies need multiple partners to fill that need for excitement, variety, and stimulation.

2) financial babies are in it for the Sugar and cover a multitude of issues even including those who are getting by but want more out of life.

3) relationship babies are in it for the positive things to be gained such as mentoring, companionship, perhaps even love.

Sugars should pick the type of partner that they want that most closely fills their needs. For example, guys who want a monogamous relationship should make sure that the baby they have selected is a similar type as they are. If a G-1 matches with a M-3, then she will be stepping out on him. And the same works the other way around. So add that component to your tool box.

Again, Escort vs. SB is one and the same. I had long term recurring relationships with several escorts I cared very much for, so I disagree that one date for money is any different than multiple dates on a regular basis. They were still escorts and saw other guys in addition to me. If one were to see a girl and elect to "help her out" without an understanding ahead of time then that sounds like a relationship, not a business deal. Overall, who cares? As a Married man I am contractually obligated to provide support to my wife in return for wifely services. Doesn't that sound like prostitution to you? Maybe if we had a contract that was legally binding we wouldn't have the issue of escort vs. Legal consort.

[QUOTE=Hernando; 1433816]Congratulations Chrissy / Mandy! The interview went well and you sounded so adorable and smart.

The thing about Sugar is that recipients come in three carnations IMHO. 1) Sexual babies and 2) financial babies and 3) relationship babies, or a mix.[/QUOTE]Nando. Thanks so much! I'm curious if you think babies can fall in multiple categories. I ask, because I would place myself in your first & third classifications. I have to have the mentoring and compassion element. Just curious you're thoughts on that.

Mandy

[QUOTE=Hernando; 1433816]The thing about Sugar is that recipients come in three carnations IMHO. 1) Sexual babies and 2) financial babies and 3) relationship babies, or a mix.

2) financial babies are in it for the Sugar and cover a multitude of issues even including those who are getting by but want more out of life.[/QUOTE]In the case of ESCORT vs. SB

I present the following evidence for consideration:

From my perspective the SB2s are escorts by the definition and action. If Sugar alone will not get alone will not get the panties to hit the floor then they are not an escort. The number of times she decides to allow the panties to hit floor should not matter. If the sole / primary reason the panties are on the floor is due to the sugar then she is an escort not a SB.

As an example, some SBs are willing to drop her panties based on the allowance proposed before we even have a meet and greet. If you are willing to present the party favors for inspection simply because I'm providing a allowance then in my book that makes them a garden tool.

Reference is made to the following quote from a SB when I asked if she was into the sex of a relationship:

"In all honesty no woman would be on this site if it weren't for the financial need. Unfortunately that is the reality of a sugardaddy / sugarbaby relationship of which many try to circumvent for their own benefit. The compensation aspect is to eleviate the money lost that I could be earning for myself during our times together."

I rest my case.

SubCmdr Out

I'm curious if you think babies can fall in multiple categories.

Mandy[/QUOTE]Absolutely everyone falls into more than one category. As I said earlier, human behavior seldom conforms to a neatly defined compartment. In fact I would proffer a list for the guys as well. What do you think? I'm sure there are items that I forgot about.

1) Sexual Daddies encompass men who have normal sexual needs who are not getting enough from their SO or do not have a sex partner as well as those who are hypersexual and have a drive that is beyond normal. Included in this group are sex addicts, OCD, bipolar disorder. There is an ICD9 listing in the psych manual but MDs are in disagreement what the strict definition is. They are reluctant to label people as having a disorder that might be an extreme variation of the Bell Curve. I think it's safe to say that if ones sexual need / behavior is interfering with the normal conduct of life activities then it verges on the pathologic.

2) Emotional Daddies are a group of guys who have a need to be loved, respected and valued by an attractive girl, and who are not receiving this validation at home or elsewhere. We all know that long term SOs can be very disparaging and disrespecting to their partner, even a successful breadwinner.

3) Helper Daddies are men who love making an impact on a woman's life who in turn will fulfil # 2. The White Knight is a classic example of this phenomenon. And

4) relationship Daddies are here to find a SO. Some older men desire young women and most do not have an entree to the world of the coed if they are over 35 t0 40. The first attraction here is support since most girls on Sugar Sites are certainly there to help with finances, but a relationship can actually develop, love happen, and a long term partnership might be evolve.

I would qualify as #'s 1, 2, and 3.

My brothers,

As reported yesterday, I was chalked in for a brief but energetic romp with my naughty British baby this early afternoon, and I dutifully reported to the locker room with a few minutes to spare before post time. As I said, she had been ringing the booty bell quite vigorously this past week or so, and the dirty talk in her posh British accent became almost more than I could bear, so you can imagine that Scottie and I were primed and ready. We find a parking space, I text up that we are here and ready for the naked weigh-in, and receive only silence from the bell tower. Now I know her mother and brother are in town, but I was assured they would be out on the architectural boat tour of Chicago, the proverbial three hour tour, and that the apartment would be entirely relative-free. I waited about 20 minutes, burned up a good 5 minutes worth of Bat Phone time in texts, all to go away unrewarded. And Brit is my go-to gal, my sure thing in times of trouble and of triumph.

What is this world coming to, I ask? New brothers take note: even a "seasoned veteran" can get turned aside from time to time. I'm sure it's nothing personal, and there will be a perfectly good explanation, and I certainly am aware that even the most docile of mothers can get cholicy, put her ears back and refuse to cooperate, but golly, doesn't that just take the cake? I cancelled on Polo for this, and my ATF is apparently U-Haul deep in her move, so I have nowhere to turn except Rosy, and at this point I'm not sure even she will say yes.

So now I'm back at my desk, Scottie's pouting, I'm trying not to think about what could have been, and I'm in a crabby mood. Thank the Lord for cocktail hour. Two hours and counting.

Please, someone post something positive to cheer me up.

Frustrated,

Scott

Scotty, Mama said there'd be days like this.

Well, I am heading down the road in about an hour to meet with my ATF HYCB for the second overnight this week. Our one year anniversary is coming up next month and I am still happily in loooove! I don't know how long this ride will continue but it is defying logic and history in this fickle SB business. I feel very boring only having one Baby and not catting around but there is safety and security in one.

Since Brit has been reliable to date I would take this as an oversight on her part. Visiting Mothers can do that to you and make even the most sexual of creatures lose their drive. Obviously if she repeats this gross dereliction of booty she might lose her Scotty privileges.

Hang in there Scot, there will be better days ahead. Nando

[QUOTE=Hernando; 1434635]I would take this as an oversight on her part. Visiting Mothers can do that to you and make even the most sexual of creatures lose their drive.

Hang in there Scott, there will be better days ahead. Nando[/QUOTE]Happy trails to you, and thanks for the laugh! I envy you your overnights. May you make it to anniversary #2 undetected by the authorities, and continue to be in love.

Scott,

Brit was AWOL, you canceled on Polo, and ATF is setting up your own personal love chamber complete with key. And you want me to feel bad for ya? Yes, I'm sitting here crying into my keyboard while reading your story (NOT).

Brother, from my perspective you strike out more times than I even get up to bat. Like I tell all my friends: "There are worse problems to have."

LOL!

SubCmdr Out

[QUOTE=SubCmdr; 1434729]Scott,

Brit was AWOL, you canceled on Polo, and ATF is setting up your own personal love chamber complete with key. And you want me to feel bad for ya? Yes, I'm sitting here crying into my keyboard while reading your story (NOT).

Brother, from my perspective you strike out more times than I even get up to bat. Like I tell all my friends: "There are worse problems to have."

LOL!

SubCmdr Out[/QUOTE]Point taken LOL.