Sugar Daddy/ Sugar Baby Dating

Activities: Wine,Good Conversation and laughs, DFK,Biting,Licking,BBBJNQNS,DT ,HJ,MSOG,CW,ACG,Lot's of squirting and O's,Lot's of fun.
Session Length: 5hrs
Fee: 500+tip(my choice)

Lol

100 an hour
Just gets better and that was recent.
Going lower.

Originally Posted by Gotyour6

GY6, you really should link the actual review.

FTFY.

GY6, you really should link the actual review.

FTFY. Originally Posted by Sidewinder

Sidewinder your the embodiment of SOUTHERN CHIVALRY... you see Ladies why we
Southern Women are hard put to relocate, my heart felt appreciation Darlen!

100 an hour my nephew could buy her with his allowance lol

Well sense every one seems so hung up on my review. I will try and address some of whats been posted.

The time was only supposed to be 2hrs. but turned into 5hrs.
why? i will leave this open for your interpretation. I am not a big fan of doing reviews or kissing and telling. I prefer to fly low.

Well sense every one seems so hung up on my review. I will try and address some of whats been posted.

The time was only supposed to be 2hrs. but turned into 5hrs.
why? i will leave this open for your interpretation. I am not a big fan of doing reviews or kissing and telling. I prefer to fly low. Originally Posted by bc7274

Why... I know is this not peculiar My Darling, simply put bc7274 is truly one of the
SEXIEST MEN I have ever encountered.
I'm but a mere Mortal who could not resist our time going over...
bc7274 and I have seen each other many times since that Review,
our R.O.S. is truly no one else's business.

A beautiful story, thank you for sharing

Ok I may be a little long winded so bare with me. Its 2 weeks to the anniversary of my husbands painful death. I miss him every day and have a hard time with the grief, especially this time of year.

This dear man was new to the hobby and had visited a few providers before SEEKING ME OUT.
We were both single and he was 22 years older then me.
We met for 1 session only before he told a mutual provider friend he wanted to be my SD ... and more. His "pretty woman" he loved that movie.

He went about it in all the right ways, first with a few more paid sessions, dinners out, whatever I wanted and within 3 months he rented me a very nice condo in New orleans. I still had the option to see clients also if I wanted.

He paid my rent and expenses, but I still paid my own personal bills like my car.
In time he paid for everything and gave me credit cards, even bought me a summer beach home in SC.

I asked a "seasoned" provider what she thought of becoming a SB, dependant on a SD and she basically told me I was stupid- umm she was the stupid one and I thank god I was smart enough to see it.

A year later we were married and I was his pride and joy- a trophy wife to him.

A few months after our wedding he started to become ill and was diagnosed with a form of terminal cancer. He was not sick at all when we met or married. No one knows what god has in store for us. Nine months after his diagnosis he passed and I was the only one at his bedside. He was loved by me and he knew this. It was the hardest thing I ever went through to bury my husband. A young widow.

This dear man changed my life forever and I thank god for him everyday. I now live by the ocean in a beautiful home in Florida and I never want for anything- for the rest of my life Im set because he loved me that much and made arrangements for me.

SB/SD relationships can work and I am proof of that- but you have to be two very special people.

Please dont criticize my post, its just my story and I needed to share. I still mourn his death so please respect this.
If you dont like my story please dont be disrespectful it would cut like a knife.

I just wanted the men & women out there looking for a sb/sd relationship to know that it can be wonderful and bitter sweet and change lives.

--- And besides that how many times have providers said they could write a book on what they have experienced! Its not a book, but it is my story. I hope I dont regret telling it Originally Posted by CRISTY-CUPPS

He took care of you and you are doing very well but yet still provide? Originally Posted by Gotyour6

I'm guessing it would be surprising to you, or difficult to even consider that many of us are not here out of financial or chemical desperation.

No i dont, its been over 4 years since Ive seen anyone in session. I just like to keep my options open just in case
I loved my career as a escort and I miss it. Its not about the money.

Its the great men, NSA SEX, travel...guilt free sex... yes I can pick up a guy anyday of the week for a roll in the sheets- but its just not the same, the men in the hobby treat us like queens. Originally Posted by CRISTY-CUPPS

Exactly! Nowhere else have I spent quality time with a gentleman, and didn't walk away feeling used, but rather valued.

I'm guessing it would be surprising to you, or difficult to even consider that many of us are not here out of financial or chemical desperation. Originally Posted by Solitaire

I would bet there are a lot of things in this world that would be difficult if not impossible for him to comprehend. He seems to have a single minded and narrow view of life and others. It's really a shame that some people cannot take a step back and see things from the perspective of others.

It's really a shame that some people cannot take a step back and see things from the perspective of others. Originally Posted by bc7274

That's a two way street brother. Several people identified early that this whole tirade is caused by people arging about two mutually exclusive points of view about what a sugar baby is without being willing to conceed the others' point of view.

GY6 is well known to take the position that a SB cannot be a hooker by definition because they have different mindsets and goals. His argument is similar to fast food vs. fine dining. McDonald's can claim they're now in the fine dining budiness, and they will certainly satisfy your hunger, but no one that actually knows fine dining at the old Tavern on the Green in NYC, Commando's Palace in New Orleans, or Centerpoint Tower in Sydney would take that claim seriously. They are very different services. He would argue its not about price, but service and quality is what makes fine dining.

On the other hand, others take the position that a SB is nothing more than repeat visits from a single client. So long as a client comes back repeatedly with more money and flowers, then they legitimately a SB. Some think that what makes a SB/SD arrangement is a high valed arrangement.

In practice, both sides are arguing that what they get in return (service for the daddy and compensation amount for the baby) is what makes the arrangement "sugar."

Yes I know its personal now, but these different two positions are what started this whole disagreemwnt.

I'm quite sure both would have lots of counterarguments for the others, but consider the following. It's not cost that makes fine dining. We all know what a $200 hamburger from McDonald's is. Instead its the service that makes the fine dining. The cost is just an economically determined amount. I believe this is a general rule. The service determines the class of good. The price follows. and sexond consider that GY6 is pretty much the mack-daddy sugar daddy on these forums. You might not like him (he's a self-admitted asshole), but he's in the top three most respected SDs on ECCIE as evidenced in the actual SD forum,". Even if you don't like him, I would not write off his position. He knows what he's talking about.

Removing the overlay comparison of fine dining and arrangements, I fear I need to disagree on the above. Fine dining is judged on four components. Yes service is one, but it must meet all four of the basic criteria to be considered a fine dining establishment. That being, first and foremost, quality of food. Fallowing with cleanliness, ambiance and of course service. Mcdonalds should never be used in the same sentence as fine dining. However, I agree to the point that some find Mcdonalds fine dining. I also concede to the idea that not everyone enjoys different high end restaurants. I, for instance, do not like the food at capital grill. A local fine dining restraint in Kansas city. I am, however, quite taken with 801 chophouse.

Back to the real subject. I admit I am moderately saddened by the prospect that GY6 is so highly respected. Not because his opinions of arrangements are wrong (or right) But simply because of his borderline abrasive way of stating his opinion. I had always considered a sugar daddy to hold some form of refinement. I hold high expectations for those that ordain to be mentors. This includes, at the very least, respecting one's own intelligence and self worth enough to not stoop to throwing stones and calling names. My apologies GY6 is this is taken offensively. I am sure outside of this board you are a wonderful sugar daddy and very generous to your sugar baby and other relationships.

GY6 may be the "mack- daddy" of SD's and he may "know what he's talking about", but only from his extremely narrow perspective. My issue is that he is very close minded to any perspectives of others. If an arrangement does not fit his extremely narrow definition, it can't possibly be a true sd/sb arrangement, I beg to differ.

I was in an arrangement with a very special lady I met here on eccie. We met as client/provider, but progressed very quickly into an arrangement which lasted about a year. It was one of the best years of my life and ended only because of a major financial setback which I incurred. She is a very mature, intelligent 30 yr. old and I enjoyed every minute we spent together, including attending the theatre, the symphony and the ballet. Of course, our BCD time was incredible, but she was so much more to me than that. I especially enjoyed our hours long conversations on a myriad of topics. During the year of our arrangement, she continued to see other gentlemen, but only a very select few which she had a prior relationship with. This was fine with me, as, #1, I am not by nature a jealous person and, #2, I never felt that I owned her. When she was not with me, I felt that she had the right to do as she pleased. I provided her with a very reasonable monthly allowance and some very frequent, nice gifts. I especially enjoyed making some of her childhood dreams come true. She never, not once, ever asked me for anything and was always very appreciative of the gifts I provided for her. I was able to provide a few "firsts" for her, including a lovely 5 day vacation out of the country, which I believe that she particularly enjoyed. To me, we had a sd/sb relationship, but I'm sure certain others will disagree. Bottom line is that we shared a wonderful relationship which was mutually beneficial and worked well for both of us.

BTW, in the almost two years since our sd/sb arrangement ended, we have become even closer and have a very special friendship. We talk via phone or Skype 4-5 times per week and continue to see each other on a very regular basis. No money has changed hands in those two years, unless you count that I still enjoy giving her the occasional nice gift.

I believe that GY6 is, most likely, a very good sd and is certainly entitled to his opinions, as we all are. I do, however, wish that he would at least acknowledge that, however rare, there is at least the possibility that a sd/sb relationship can exist outside the narrow parameters he has set and that, in fact, a provider can be a sb. Again, it may be rare and unusual, but it can happen. It seems to me that he primarily preys upon very young, unsophisticated and somewhat naïve girls, who think that dinner at Applebee's is special. I wonder if, perhaps, a mature, strong, intelligent and independent woman intimidates him. Hmmmnm, food for thought???

It seems to me that he primarily preys upon very young, unsophisticated and somewhat naïve girls, who think that dinner at Applebee's is special. I wonder if, perhaps, a mature, strong, intelligent and independent woman intimidates him. Hmmmnm, food for thought??? Originally Posted by stimulatethemind

Good to see I'm not the only one who got that impression.

Good to see I'm not the only one who got that impression. Originally Posted by bc7274

What's wrong with Applebee's? LOL bc; sometimes its the closest place to meet and eat and talk...before proceeding....

I've ENJOYED THIS THREAD AND THIS APPLIES TO NO ONE PARTICULAR:

I think sometimes like the lady, he (the one you bc replied to), had the relationship with had the right attitude: gratitude....small or large gifts is not really the point, in my opinion, its the thought that counts and he gave her things that meant something to her.

A girl/lady with humility, modesty, gratitude, honesty, genuine character, a good sense of humor, down to earth, and gentle on the ears (gives good "phone") and the eyes is just as much if not more sexy than the high and mighty attitude, high-maintenance lady who EXPECT the expensive gifts and extensive expectations-- will end up being just that: an EX!

Sorry for my last post (especially all the grammar issues). I was half asleep after a long night of drinking, lol.

Fine dining is judged on four components. Yes service is one, but it must meet all four of the basic criteria to be considered a fine dining establishment. That being, first and foremost, quality of food. Fallowing with cleanliness, ambiance and of course service. Originally Posted by JayceeRivers

This illustrates my key point perfectly. This entire discussion is completely based on nomenclature. I was using the term "service" broadly to include ambiance, cleanliness, and quality. I value your opinion highly Jaycee, but I feel like this is the same discussion people are having on the SB/SD issue.

At the end of the day, there is not yet a governing body that dictates what constitutes a SB/SD relationship. Until we have a US Department of "Sugar" that proposes a rule to precisely define sugar arrangements, we're going to keep having these discussions, much like you and I are now apparently disagreeing over the breadth of the term "service". But for convenience sake, why is it wrong to use the terms that the SDs have been using for years (which I add is far more precise then lumping any long-term arrangement into the SB category)?

My issue is that he is very close minded to any perspectives of others. If an arrangement does not fit his extremely narrow definition, it can't possibly be a true sd/sb arrangement, I beg to differ. Originally Posted by stimulatethemind

Again, we are arguing semantics. But as a thought are you not just as guilty of being narrow-minded for insisting on a semantics issue just as forcefully? In that sense, you're being just as intolerant (i.e., narrow-minded) of GY6's view as he is of yours.

It seems to me that he primarily preys upon very young, unsophisticated and somewhat naïve girls, who think that dinner at Applebee's is special. I wonder if, perhaps, a mature, strong, intelligent and independent woman intimidates him. Hmmmnm, food for thought??? Originally Posted by stimulatethemind

Hmm. This seems to be quite unsound and am improper characterization. Note in the following thread that his GF is his SB of three years.

http://eccie.net/showthread.php?t=1232167

I'm not trying to become GY6's errand boy. To be honest, I've talked with him like twice since I've been on these boards.

Nevertheless, I'm not sure what your basis for assuming that his SB is not mature, strong, intelligent, and independent is. You characterize him as "preying" on young girls by taking his SB on lavish vacations, paying their rent and utilities, buying her gifts, and generally just being there for her? I don't think your comment stands up at all under scrutiny.

Again, he may be blunt and that may offend you, but that doesn't mean he's taking advantage of his SBs, and ad hominem attacks are poor form indeed. He certainly has the ethos to survive such attacks in my eyes.

Honestly however, it feels like several are arguing so diligently because they want to be a member of the SB/SD club. GY6 may call your arrangement a hooker on retainer. You may call his an exclusive version of a SB/SD arrangement. Who really gives a shit? The problem is that by changing the terms and using them differently on the same board, all we're doing is devaluing those terms and making them very imprecise, creating a muck of confusion to where no one understands and now instead of just saying "hooker-on-retainer" or "SB" we have to explain what the fuck that means. Every. Time.

My point is...

Why is it so hard to just go with how a huge portion of people already use the terms on these forums? If you want to think of yourself as a SD or SB, do it. I mean, if the root problem is you're offended that someone is telling you that you were a mere hooker-on-retainer when you thought of yourself as a SB, then by all means think of yourself as a SB. But when you discuss, call it what it is. We have several guys that have hooker-on-retainer active in the SD forums. They're part of the crew, but they don't try to paint themselves as something they're not. They freely discuss the UTR hooker they found on SA, or the hooker-on-retainer relationship they just started with an ECCIE provider. If you want a SB, get a SB. If you want a hooker-on-retainer, then get one. But when you're discussing, for everyone's sanity, call it what it is.

Lastly, I can totally foresee people arguing back at me based upon definitions in this thread. I think that is very dangerous. This thread is full of comments by people that have never thought of themselves as SD/SBs, others that started reading it and just decided to jump on the bandwagon and have no clue what a SB/SD relationship is yet still give their opinion about what it means, and trolls. There is no credibility to 99% of what this thread discloses, lol. As a parallel, it would be like laymen arguing the definition of a scientific or medical word. Leave that to the scientists and physicians and everyone else just go along. Please.

If you're going to argue with me, honestly ask yourself if you've every talked with a group of people outside of this thread about what a SB/SD relationship is. I have. GY6 has. We've spent literally years discussing and encouraging would be daddies there, trying to help them out. If you have a credible reason for why the definitions that all the SDs on these boards use are wrong, then by all means call us on it. But if you're arguing semantics with us because you would rather be (or in the case of gentlemen think of your girl as) a SB than a hooker-on-retainer, please spare us. This is a hooker board. We gave up all of our modesty when we created our accounts.