Get our best content

~max once a week~

Facts: we hate sugar babies because they’re competition They are a new generation of women—who believe in total body autonomy. Opposition comes down to sour fucking grapes.

I stumbled across this website a few days ago, and I was both repulsed and fascinated by it. It’s called Earn The Necklace, with the tagline Young Women….Rich, Older Men….Juicy Confessions.

And it’s not a joke. Earn the Necklace has as of the time of writing a US Alexa Ranking of 33,254, meaning it’s a rather popular site. This shit really happens.

Of course Jezebel has cottoned on to this, and my goodness, did they ever work hard to spin it into something dangerous and depressing.

Are you a young woman who likes money or an old man with money who likes young women and would like to use aforementioned money to perhaps buy a young woman? If so, you may be profiled in a recently published piece that combines two of the least fun subjects in the world: the concept of sugar babies — young women who hook up with rich old dudes so the old dudes buy them crap, often at great risk to themselves and their own well-being— and Miami, Florida.

Maybe I’m missing something. Somebody clue me in as to how having a rich, older boyfriend pay all your bills puts the WOMAN at risk? Is there a danger she might accidentally suffocate under the bag of cash her Sugar Daddy provides her?

What really sucks about sugar baby relationships is that most of the arrangements don’t seem like they’re entered into freely; they’re a desperate response to a shitty set of circumstances — a lack of job opportunities, lack of job abilities, and last, but not least, the insanely high cost of college education.

Oh, poor wittle duckies. No job skills (whose fault is that) and the high cost of education (boo hoo). And no job opportunities in Miami. Let’s see. says there are 1000’s of jobs in Miami, right at this very moment.

Oh, but those jobs are sucky. You have to show up at inconvenient times and actually work. Sugar Babies get paid to look nice and have sex, and there aren’t a whole lot of jobs out there with those requirements.

Wait. Yes there are. It’s called prostitution. Uh-oh. Cue the histrionics! Ladies, you can be anything you want to be. Except a stay at home mother. Or a hooker.

In short, young women in south Florida are turning to what basically amounts to internet prostitution with expensive cocktails for the same reason that Walter White started cooking meth on Breaking Bad: because America is untenably, depressingly fucked up.

Really, when you consider the freedom being a sugar baby grants to women, it’s rather curious that feminists don’t stand up to applaud Sugar Babies. You go girl! Get that money! He’s only rich because patriarchy anyways!

And some Sugar Babies are in it for serious cash.

This is Chanel. She wants $20 000/month. Jesus. Her college must charge a lot of tuition.

Whitney on the other hand will settle for just $10 000/month. Well, she’s young. Her value might go up when she gets a little experience?

Oh, now, there I think the problem lies. No, Whitney’s value won’t go UP over time, it will go down. Sexual economics. Men will pay for beauty and sex, and a straightforward cash transaction comes with benefits. Mostly, the ability to avoid long-term financial obligations and a way to control Lady Drama. The Sugar Babies understand this well. Pick a fight, but keep it trivial. There is only so much bullshit your rich boyfriend is willing to tolerate.

Okay, I just did a Google search to confirm that men have not (as of yet) been held financially liable for their mistresses, and I came across this: it turns out that the Wife can sue the Other Woman under Alienation of Affection laws, which are in effect in seven US states.

Cynthia Shackelford was awarded $9million when she took her husband’s mistress to court! Holy crap! That’s quite an award. The senior ladies take infidelity pretty seriously, now don’t they?

Let’s Google Shackelford and Jezebel to see how they reacted. And here we are:

What happened to Shackelford is horrible, and she probably is in shock and isn’t thinking clearly. But just because she thinks the marriage was “great” doesn’t make it so — it just means her husband was a really good liar. Sleeping with a man you know is married is a shitty thing to do, but someone needs to explain to Shackelford that her husband, not his mistress, is the one who broke a vow to be faithful.

Hmm. Curious. So Jezebel does NOT support the right of young, attractive women to capitalize on their sexual appeal in whatever ways they deem appropriate, but neither do they support the rights of older women to go after these HomeWreckers.

Why? Because in the first scenario, men get some benefits that only young attractive women can provide. Sugar Babies skew the competitive landscape, and that makes the older ladies who wasted their most attractive years studying Comparative Women’s Literature and refusing to shave a wee bit tiffed.

Ladies haven’t lost their lust for men who can provide for them. Not in the least.

But they have lost the ability to attract those breadwinning men, because they forgot that men don’t give away their cash for nothing: they want beauty and love and youth and children in exchange.

The hour-glass figure, signaling fertility and reproductive health, appeals to men universally.


Sugar Babies are a new generation of women, raised to believe they have complete autonomy over their own bodies and sexuality, learning to connect the dots in a capitalist economy. The vocal opposition from feminists comes down to one thing: sour fucking grapes.

They can’t compete. And the suggestion that men’s desires and natural inclinations are perfectly acceptable and manageable further pisses them off. Real men love PEOPLE, not bodies.

Well, yes. Real men DO love people, but those people come in bodies, and some of those bodies are more appealing than others. All the screaming in the world isn’t going to change that, and young women, who are far from stupid, see that when the supply is tightened, the demand goes up.

And so does the price.

The payout for being The Other Woman can be very high indeed. Given the loathing that feminism demonstrates for the two women they hate the most in the world, housewives and hookers, one would think the feminist ladies would love to see the Pretty Young Things get their comeuppance.

But that is in conflict with the central premise of feminism: women are VICTIMS only. When forced to choose, they cling to the Victim Mentality, and blame MEN, and only men, for infidelity. The wife is obviously a victim because CHEATING BASTARD, but the mistress is a victim too because EXPLOITATION.

It’s a pretty impressive little hamster dance, isn’t it?

Earn the Necklace paints a very different picture. The only thing these women are victims of is avarice and laziness. Sugar Daddies know what they are getting, and they are not victimized in any way, but neither are the Sugar Babies. They know how to exploit their own value, and how to maximize their incomes. They are strategic in extracting maximum payouts for minimal inputs. They take their careers very seriously, and invest heavily in themselves. It’s almost like they “Lean In”, no?

What Sugar Babies do is challenge the notion that women are perpetually exploited children incapable of making rational decisions about their own sexuality and bodies. (What if we framed the abortion debate in the same terms as we frame prostitution? Poor ladies exploited by murderous abortionists, unable to make rational decisions about their own bodies and sexuality. Yeah, no.)

And what Sugar Babies do more than anything else is validate the Sugar Daddies. Male sexuality is a powerful force, not to be contained and dampened, but to be exploited. Obviously, there is a very dark undercurrent running along that assertion, but the Sugar Baby/Sugar Daddy relationship puts men’s desires front and center, alongside women’s.

If there is exploitation going on in these partnerships (and from the sentiments on Earn the Necklace, there most certainly IS exploitation), one thing is certain: it goes both ways.

There’s a word for that: Equality.

I personally have no problem with these transactional relationships. I assume both the men and the women involved understand the deal and consider the benefits to outweigh the costs. What business is it of mine? The existence of Sugar Babies just ensures that I keep myself as competitive as possible.

Dara Torres was 45 when she bid for a spot on the Olympic Swim Team. She came fourth, against her much, much younger competitors, and missed out on her sixth Olympiad.

She may have missed the cut by one place, but hot damn!

She’s still on her game. I wonder how much she could get per month? It’s not like she would be the first Olympian to escort on the side.

Suzie Favor Hamilton is no spring chicken, either, but she still plays by the rules of the game.

Men like beauty. They always have and always will. And they will pay for it. Some will pay with a lifetime of labor and loyalty, like my husband. And some will pay $50 000/month.

Well, for Chanel’s sake, and all the other Sugar Babies out there, I hope so.

College has never been more expensive.

Sorry, Afrunauts! While 85% of you are wonderful people, the other 25% were far too frequently brigades and troll farms. Their abusive comments have traumatized our moderators, and so we can't allow comments until we have built an ethical way to address the troll problem. If you feel the calling and you have familiarized yourself with what is and isn't free speech, you can still email us your scribbles. If your feedback is excellent, we may manually add it!
PS. The A Black Woman Is Speaking mug is a standing invitation to sit down, shut up, and engage in the wisdom shared by Black women. Lord knows the world needs it right now.

Anonymous X

Do you have anything you’d love to share with a large audience? We’ll read your submissions and you may be featured on AFRU. Email us at [email protected].

5 thoughts on “<span class="entry-title-primary">Facts: we hate sugar babies because they’re competition</span> <span class="entry-subtitle">They are a new generation of women—who believe in total body autonomy. Opposition comes down to sour fucking grapes.</span>”

  1. Beauty is an asset. No point not capitalizing on it. The rich fart gets a trophy, she gets cash. What’s needed now is an investment advisory service for these girls, to make them realise that beauty is a diminishing asset and they need to capitalize on it as fast and furiously as possible. Less shoes, more stocks and bonds.

    The only real problem with these arrangements is the pretense. Other people see hotties with old geezers and get the impression that hotties are genuinely attracted to fat, balding middle aged men. Then they start hitting on girls themselves, not realising that girls find them disgusting.

  2. I’m pretty sure most wealthy older men dating/marrying much younger women know the score. Any one that doesn’t is a first class fool. The Eagles have a song “Lying Eyes”.

    The only choice the much older man has is to turn a blind eye to her “friends”. That is if he wants companionship from a much younger woman. If he doesn’t, he can kick her out. But then he’ll be alone or forced to hook up with women closer to his own age.

    Remember, “monogamy” is not necessarily “natural”. And it certainly isn’t when there is a huge age gap.

    We really need to start getting pragmatic about mating.

    • “But then he’ll be alone or forced to hook up with women closer to his own age.”

      … or there are dozens of thrill-seeking co-eds (or, more accurately, disillusioned Master Degree holding Starbucks employees) that will happily take her place, if the price is right.


Say your thing

Get our best content

~max once a week~