New girlfriend use to be a sugar baby..

[Anonymous]

As long as the sugar daddy wasn't married I don't see it as a problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You don't "choose" to be gay. Most men would rather be celibate or set themselves on fire than be gay.

That's why so many men in prison are celibate and/or set themselves on fire.

Turn your nation into a prison for men, don't be surprised if a lot of them take up homosexuality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All women are prostitutes unless they are too ugly to pull it off. Get over it people, it's really not a big deal.

Agreed. Exchanging money/security for sex is as old as humanity and ingrained in us by evolution.

Nope. I pay my own way. I'm no one's whore.

This attitude about women is a reason increasing numbers are choosing lesbianism. Relationships are about more than sex, but a lot of men don't seem to think so.

You're joking. Look at the number of women who write about the guy needing to have a high profile high status high income job. They aren't interested in a relationship, they're interested in a McMansion and a club membership. Look at the women who encourage others to always have an exit strategy. They lack a certain commitment to a relationship. Look at the divorced women who wrote a couple weeks back about how a man would have to convince them through some herclulean feat to become unsingle again. That's not a realistic mindset if you actually want a relationship (but it's a common one).

A lot of women have very mercenary mindsets. The problems aren't all with the men.

+1

I think most men see through this, and don't want a gold digger, however.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don't "choose" to be gay. Most men would rather be celibate or set themselves on fire than be gay.

That's why so many men in prison are celibate and/or set themselves on fire.

Turn your nation into a prison for men, don't be surprised if a lot of them take up homosexuality.

You noticed how I said "most men"? No, guess not. Work on that reading comprehension. And most of the men in prison who have homosexual encounters do not choose to do so.

Moron.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You don't "choose" to be gay. Most men would rather be celibate or set themselves on fire than be gay.

That's why so many men in prison are celibate and/or set themselves on fire.

Turn your nation into a prison for men, don't be surprised if a lot of them take up homosexuality.

You noticed how I said "most men"? No, guess not. Work on that reading comprehension. And most of the men in prison who have homosexual encounters do not choose to do so.

Moron.

According to US DOJ there are less than 300 substantiated claims of nonconsensual prisoner sex per year in the US (the imprisoned population is around 2.2 million).

The book "Orange is the New Black" covered this topic a bit as well, and it's overwhelmingly consensual in women's prisons, too.

[Anonymous]

OP - did you girlfriend tell you whether her friend was married?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is this any different than the various sad, scorned SAHM's that want to leave but "need the financial support"?

Because they are married and have children together dumbass.

That doesn't change a thing. They're still having all their sh*t paid for by a paramour, in exchange for either sex (as someone pointed out, debateable) or for the social recognition of accompanying the other person. It's still USING the other person for money.

You're f*cked in the head if that's how you see a sahm.

+ 1 someone forgot to take their medicine.

You forgot the part about a SAHM that stays in a marriage for the money not for the love. And I'm a female and I don't see a difference either.

Being female doesn't make you any smarter.

In any case, exchanging sex for money is still prostitution. Clearly you are one and are trying to justify why your kind of prostituon is okay but another woman's version is not.

Wow, impressive leap. You should consider becoming a stuntman/woman.

Most women on DCUM don't want to work; they want a marriage where the man is not just the primary breadwinner, but the only breadwinner.

What these women bring to the table is sex; or at least they pretend to in the beginning.

They are still exchanging sex for money and are thus prostitutes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All women are prostitutes unless they are too ugly to pull it off. Get over it people, it's really not a big deal.

Agreed. Exchanging money/security for sex is as old as humanity and ingrained in us by evolution.

Nope. I pay my own way. I'm no one's whore.

This attitude about women is a reason increasing numbers are choosing lesbianism. Relationships are about more than sex, but a lot of men don't seem to think so.

You're joking. Look at the number of women who write about the guy needing to have a high profile high status high income job. They aren't interested in a relationship, they're interested in a McMansion and a club membership. Look at the women who encourage others to always have an exit strategy. They lack a certain commitment to a relationship. Look at the divorced women who wrote a couple weeks back about how a man would have to convince them through some herclulean feat to become unsingle again. That's not a realistic mindset if you actually want a relationship (but it's a common one).

A lot of women have very mercenary mindsets. The problems aren't all with the men.

+1

I think most men see through this, and don't want a gold digger, however.

Most men have their weiners think for them. So no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All women are prostitutes unless they are too ugly to pull it off. Get over it people, it's really not a big deal.

Agreed. Exchanging money/security for sex is as old as humanity and ingrained in us by evolution.

Nope. I pay my own way. I'm no one's whore.

This attitude about women is a reason increasing numbers are choosing lesbianism. Relationships are about more than sex, but a lot of men don't seem to think so.

You're joking. Look at the number of women who write about the guy needing to have a high profile high status high income job. They aren't interested in a relationship, they're interested in a McMansion and a club membership. Look at the women who encourage others to always have an exit strategy. They lack a certain commitment to a relationship. Look at the divorced women who wrote a couple weeks back about how a man would have to convince them through some herclulean feat to become unsingle again. That's not a realistic mindset if you actually want a relationship (but it's a common one).

A lot of women have very mercenary mindsets. The problems aren't all with the men.

+1

I think most men see through this, and don't want a gold digger, however.

Most men have their weiners think for them. So no.

My 'wiener' doesn't have a brain to think with. It receives messages from my brain and only acts when told to by my brain. Fortunately, even at my 'advanced age' it still is capable of coming to attention when it receives the message to do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
According to US DOJ there are less than 300 substantiated claims of nonconsensual prisoner sex per year in the US (the imprisoned population is around 2.2 million).

The book "Orange is the New Black" covered this topic a bit as well, and it's overwhelmingly consensual in women's prisons, too.

You are truly a moron if you believe there are only 300 prison rapes per year. Mind-bogglingly stupid. Gee, ya think it's underreported at all?

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/svsfpri07.pdf

In this survey, 4.5% of the inmates reported sexual victimization -- so, out of 2.2 million today, that would be 99,000. A little more than 300.

Furthermore, as Human Rights Watch notes, the idea of "consensual" homosexual encounters in prison is problematic:

https://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/prison/report5.html

Consent and Coercion in Prison

[A]ll choices and relationships are so constrained and limited in the unfree world of the prison that what is normally meant by such terms as "free" or "voluntary" does not apply.

-- James Gilligan, M.D., former director of mental health of the Massachusetts prison system(230)

The existence of freely given consent or, conversely, the absence of coercion, is a critical factor in distinguishing sexual abuse from mere sex.(231) But in the context of imprisonment, much more so than in the outside world, the concepts of consent and coercion are extremely slippery. Prisons and jails are inherently coercive environments. Inmates enjoy little autonomy and little possibility of free choice, making it difficult to ascertain whether an inmate's consent to anything is freely given.(232) Distinguishing coerced sex from consensual sex can be especially difficult.

Human Rights Watch has previously addressed the issue of inmates' consent to sex in the specific case of women inmates' sexual relations with correctional officers. In light of officers' enormous authority over inmates--a power imbalance that eviscerates traditional notions of consent--we concluded that custodial sexual contact should be deemed a criminal act even in the absence of overt or implied coercion.(233)

Prisoner-on-prisoner sexual contact might first appear to pose very different questions than custodial sexual contact as, formally at least, prisoners are not supposed to be able to exercise power over each other. The reality, however, is that in most prisons, even those where correctional authorities make a reasonable effort to maintain control of their charges, an inmate hierarchy exists by which certain prisoners enjoy a great deal of power over their fellows and other prisoners are exposed to exploitation and abuse. This power imbalance is of course much more marked in prisons where the authorities have ceded effective control to the inmate population, an all too common occurrence. Indeed, where "the inmates run the prison"--a phrase Human Rights Watch heard on several occasions--some of the most abusive relationships take place with little or no need for threats or other overtly coercive acts. For some prisoners, the atmosphere of fear and intimidation is so overwhelming that they acquiesce in their sexual exploitation without putting up any obvious resistance. J.D., incarcerated in Colorado, explained how this happened to him:

I came to prison in April, 1991. I'd never been to prison before. I basically feared for my life . . . . Eventually, I ended up with a roommate who took advantage of my situation. He made me feel "protected" somewhat. But, at the same time, he let me know he could quite capably beat me up, if he wanted. One night, after we were all locked down for the night, he told me he could help me overcome my sexual inhibitions, if I would let him. He told me he was bisexual. I knew he was quite sexually active, so to speak, as he had female pornography in the room as well as masturbating frequently to it. But, I was surprised he would come on to me. However, I felt very much in danger if I did not give in to him. I was very scared. I ended up letting him penetrate me anally. After this, I would feign sleep at night when he'd come in. But, there were several more times he forced me to perform sexually.(234)

Viewed from outside, the sexual relationship between J.D. and his cellmate would likely have appeared consensual. Indeed, in instances where the victim makes little apparent effort to escape the abuse, both prisoners and prison authorities often fall into the trap of viewing nonconsensual sexual activity as consensual, ignoring the larger context in which the activity takes place.(235) Consent, however, assumes the existence of choice. As will be described in more detail below, where prisoners feel unprotected and know in advance that their escape routes are closed, a narrow focus on consent is misguided. In other words, the relevant inquiry in evaluating sexual activity in prison is not simply "did the inmate consent to sex?" but also "did the inmate have the power to refuse unwanted sex?"

It is important to note, moreover, that it is these apparently "consensual" sexual acts that are least likely ever to come to the attention of correctional authorities. J.D., like most inmates in his position, never told the authorities about his situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is this any different than the various sad, scorned SAHM's that want to leave but "need the financial support"?

Because they are married and have children together dumbass.

That doesn't change a thing. They're still having all their sh*t paid for by a paramour, in exchange for either sex (as someone pointed out, debateable) or for the social recognition of accompanying the other person. It's still USING the other person for money.

You're f*cked in the head if that's how you see a sahm.

+ 1 someone forgot to take their medicine.

You forgot the part about a SAHM that stays in a marriage for the money not for the love. And I'm a female and I don't see a difference either.

Being female doesn't make you any smarter.

In any case, exchanging sex for money is still prostitution. Clearly you are one and are trying to justify why your kind of prostituon is okay but another woman's version is not.

Wow, impressive leap. You should consider becoming a stuntman/woman.

Most women on DCUM don't want to work; they want a marriage where the man is not just the primary breadwinner, but the only breadwinner.

What these women bring to the table is sex; or at least they pretend to in the beginning.

They are still exchanging sex for money and are thus prostitutes.

Housekeeping, cooking and looking after kids is a lot of work, a full time job for anyone who is really taking it seriously. The problem is that many men now want a sex kitten who will let him do anything, a maid, breeder and a wage earner, all in one person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Housekeeping, cooking and looking after kids is a lot of work, a full time job for anyone who is really taking it seriously. The problem is that many men now want a sex kitten who will let him do anything, a maid, breeder and a wage earner, all in one person.

Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is this any different than the various sad, scorned SAHM's that want to leave but "need the financial support"?

Because they are married and have children together dumbass.

That doesn't change a thing. They're still having all their sh*t paid for by a paramour, in exchange for either sex (as someone pointed out, debateable) or for the social recognition of accompanying the other person. It's still USING the other person for money.

You're f*cked in the head if that's how you see a sahm.

+ 1 someone forgot to take their medicine.

You forgot the part about a SAHM that stays in a marriage for the money not for the love. And I'm a female and I don't see a difference either.

Being female doesn't make you any smarter.

In any case, exchanging sex for money is still prostitution. Clearly you are one and are trying to justify why your kind of prostituon is okay but another woman's version is not.

Wow, impressive leap. You should consider becoming a stuntman/woman.

Most women on DCUM don't want to work; they want a marriage where the man is not just the primary breadwinner, but the only breadwinner.

What these women bring to the table is sex; or at least they pretend to in the beginning.

They are still exchanging sex for money and are thus prostitutes.

Housekeeping, cooking and looking after kids is a lot of work, a full time job for anyone who is really taking it seriously. The problem is that many men now want a sex kitten who will let him do anything, a maid, breeder and a wage earner, all in one person.

Ugh, totally agree. I don't really blame them, though - I think it's just too difficult now to support a family on one income. I think nearly all men would be happy to be the sole income generator if it were possible without stress and future uncertainty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Housekeeping, cooking and looking after kids is a lot of work, a full time job for anyone who is really taking it seriously. The problem is that many men now want a sex kitten who will let him do anything, a maid, breeder and a wage earner, all in one person.

Funny, despite the fact that we were living on my income (she didn't get paid that much) and she demanded kids, my little sex kitten also demanded to be a wage earner herself. She wanted it all - career and children - whether there were enough hours in the day to do that or not. Then she makes a unilateral decision to keep up with the Jones, rushing around like a maniac because some hyperactive woman up the street gets off on doing that: work, ballet practice, PTA, too many things in one day. I support that decision of hers up to a point and drag my feet after a while. And I get accused of having unrealistic expectations?

[Anonymous]

Op you've never addressed how your GF feels about what she did. Is she remorseful? Does she know why she did it? These are important details!!