Is gold digging illegal

Just curious, are gold diggers breaking the law? If the law is that you can't exchange sex for money, and that is essentially what they are doing - dating a man they have no interest in simply because he has money and/or buys them valuable things.

I'm not talking about real providers, just girls who actively go out trying to date men for their money. It's not uncommon. But I've never heard of anyone being arrested for it. I guess they could use the "but officer I wasn't dating him for his money, I actually just get turned on by 90 year old men even though I'm 25 and look like a supermodel" excuse, but that's just as flimsy as the "paying provider for her time as a donation blahblahblah" excuse for prostitution.

So how is this not something that is prosecuted?

Just curious, are gold diggers breaking the law? If the law is that you can't exchange sex for money, and that is essentially what they are doing - dating a man they have no interest in simply because he has money and/or buys them valuable things.

I'm not talking about real providers, just girls who actively go out trying to date men for their money. It's not uncommon. But I've never heard of anyone being arrested for it. I guess they could use the "but officer I wasn't dating him for his money, I actually just get turned on by 90 year old men even though I'm 25 and look like a supermodel" excuse, but that's just as flimsy as the "paying provider for her time as a donation blahblahblah" excuse for prostitution.

So how is this not something that is prosecuted? Originally Posted by rpimps

LoL. I wish it were. But dating in a real relationship is not illegal. You know her real name and spend time together on a normal regular basis. Sure she screws you (in more ways than one). But shes not solely providing bcd activities. Ask yourself this. How many providers do you know where you know their real name, family, and lives?

Thats part of where the line is drawn. You have a REAL relationship with the gold digger.

LoL. I wish it were. But dating in a real relationship is not illegal. You know her real name and spend time together on a normal regular basis. Sure she screws you (in more ways than one). But shes not solely providing bcd activities. Ask yourself this. How many providers do you know where you know their real name, family, and lives?

Thats part of where the line is drawn. You have a REAL relationship with the gold digger. Originally Posted by Texanbychoice

Is there a specific law that exempts it from being classed as prostitution, or is this more of a subjective thing for judges to decide?

Dude, it is like the definition of pornography. You know it when you see it. There is no set of legal tests to determine if someone is committing prostitution. If we go by your definition, most marriages could be considered a form of prostitution.

The legal definition really is solicitation. The act by which both parties are intentionally trading cash or services for sexual favors. It is the transaction and more specifically the time frame in which the transaction and sexual services take place. It is a quid pro quo. He gives her an agreed to X amount of dollars, and she providers specific sexual services. This transaction is usually narrowly defined as occurring within about a 1-5 hour time period.

Now some young girl fucking an older man is not a "transactional" agreement like solicitation. There is no specific quid pro quo. She may fuck the geezer 10 times before he buys her something. On the flip side, he may just buy her a gift or give her cash for no reason. There may not be sex for 2 weeks.

The OP's question has been REPEATEDLY answered here over the years - NO - usually using the term 'sugar baby' rather than its synonym, 'gold-digger.'

There is no set of legal tests to determine if someone is committing prostitution. Originally Posted by Cpalmson

Actually, there are -- the elements set forth in the statute making prostitution an offense.

The legal definition really is solicitation. The act by which both parties are intentionally trading cash or services for sexual favors. Originally Posted by Cpalmson

That may be a valid definition of 'solicitation' in other states, but that is NOT the definition of 'solicitation' in Texas. In Texas, a person can commit the offense of prostitution in any of four ways. 'Solicitation' is only ONE way. Further, the State need NOT prove that cash was traded. Here are the four ways:

(1) making an offer,
(2) accepting an offer, or
(3) soliciting a person in a public place
to engage in sexual conduct for a fee, or
(4) engaging in sexual conduct for a fee.

It was true love....

You know, her life was quite an arc, beauty-wise. You had:

1. tall (5'11") and skinny pre-implant white trash Vickie Smith, working at the Chicken Shack in Mexia (she was a 'B' cup, at most)
2. glamorous Houston stripper Vickie Smith (still a 'B' cup)
3. humongous implants (DD/E) Vickie Smith (I assume J. Howard Marshall funded the boob job)
4. very curvy Guess? girl/Playboy cover girl/PMOM/PMOY Vickie Smith (still one of the hottest centerfolds ever)
5. pop sensation Anna Nicole Smith
6. drugged out and eventually dead media freak Anna Nicole Smith

(1) making an offer,
(2) accepting an offer, or
(3) soliciting a person in a public place
to engage in sexual conduct for a fee, or
(4) engaging in sexual conduct for a fee. Originally Posted by ShysterJon

That's exactly what I'm referring to though. I'm not trying to sound like a shallow asshole, but let's be honest if a 20 year old girl who looks like a VS model is dating an unattractive guy who happens to be extremely rich, it's pretty obvious she's with him for his money. Does the "fee" have to pertain to a single specific act of sex or just any general relation? The gold digger might not be getting a fee for each specific time they have sex, but she is certainly getting that fee at some point in the relationship either in the form of cash or a credit card or a thousand dollar Gucci bag that she can exchange for cash, etc. If the fee has to be associated with a specific sexual act then why does the "that provider isn't being paid for sex, she's being paid for her time" excuse not fly? It's essentially the same thing. I'm getting the impression that the law just twists itself to prosecute the people it wants to prosecute and ignores others based on what's culturally acceptable rather than what is actually written in the law.

Your question has already been answered in this thread. You may not agree with the answer, but the answer is there. Sex with a prostitute involves a discrete (that is, separate or distinct) pay for play transaction, often between people who just met. The provider hangs up her figurative shingle, inviting all comers as long as they pass her screening and pay her fee, which is based on the duration of the encounter. The provider may see dozens of hobbyists in a given month.

By contrast, a sugar daddy and a sugar baby may do many things other than fuck, like go to museums, plays, concerts, restaurants, shopping, etc. The SD pays for these things. In addition, the SD may give his SB an allowance, often in advance once the relationship has developed. The SD may also pay for his SB's rent, car payment, medical care, etc. There is a certain degree of exclusivity in the relationship -- that is, the SB may only play with her SD, or maybe only her bf and her SD. SBs usually have jobs or go to school or both. Often, a SD may have to have multiple dates with the SB before she'll let him steal the pootie.

Here's an example to illustrate the point: I saw my SB the other day. Once we were alone, I tried to make a move. But the little monkey said she wasn't in the mood because she failed her sociology test. My reaction: 'Oh, well. Better luck next time.' Imagine that reaction with a provider.

The bottom line is the two types of relationships are VERY, VERY different. Most providers would never consider being a SB because their volume business results in large amounts of cash, which many use for things like supporting their lameass bf's and for entertaining substances. SBs, on the other hand, use their allowance for things like tuition and books.

btw, you have an odd view of SDs and SBs, maybe based on watching too many movies. In reality, most SBs are just normal girls trying to build a better life. Anna Nichol Smiths are few and far between.

Believe it or not, there are many reasons younger hot chicks date older rich guys, and it's not just about the money. Really. But regardless, most women want to be with a man who has a higher net worth, why wouldn't they?

Do you think any girl who dates rich guys is a "gold digger" and therefore a prostitute of sorts?

And SJ is right, your hobby ideals seem to be rooted in Hollywood fantasy...as stated in another thread, you'll probably continue to be disappointed if you don't get a dose of reality soon.

^ I was mainly just interested in the topic. Not trying to put down any SBs or insult them. When I see a 20 year old supermodel dating and having sex with an extremely unattractive man who happens to drive a Maserati, I assume that she's with him for his money, like I'm sure many people do. If this isn't the case and I'm wrong then so be it, thank you for answering the question.

Rp.
I dont think your getting whats been said. Yeah with a sb there is cash involved. But its not a transaction such as Gimme cash i fuck you. Its a relatuonship with sb's. We go to dinner. We go to opera. We go home and fuck. Crap i got finals and rents due. Daddy pays the rent. I fail my final. Daddy dont get no pootie. There is a defined relationship (of sorts) that goes past fucking.

Rp.
I dont think your getting whats been said. Yeah with a sb there is cash involved. But its not a transaction such as Gimme cash i fuck you. Its a relatuonship with sb's. We go to dinner. We go to opera. We go home and fuck. Crap i got finals and rents due. Daddy pays the rent. I fail my final. Daddy dont get no pootie. There is a defined relationship (of sorts) that goes past fucking. Originally Posted by Texanbychoice

Thanks, that makes sense

Yep, usually in prostitution, though not expressly stated in statutes, there needs to be an obvious quid pro quo.

Rpimps. Check out the Diamonds and Tuxedo section for more discussion of this topic.

Check out the Diamonds and Tuxedo section for more discussion of this topic. Originally Posted by Your Naughty Muse

Um, what topic? Being a sugar daddy? There's a whole forum devoted to the topic available to guys with premium access. NGA (no girls allowed) in the treehouse, though. Haha.