Young women open to “sugar relationships” may experience deeper psychological vulnerabilities, difficulties with emotional coping and relationship skills. Acceptance of trading intimacy for material benefits is often linked to negative childhood experiences that shape how a person views themselves.
Women who are open to “sugar arrangements” tend to show deeper psychological vulnerabilities
24 Comments
[removed]
Where does one sign up?!
TLDR/SYAC: childhood experiences linked to how a person views themselves.
This is GROUNDBREAKING!
stop the presses! wake the kids! phone the neighbors!
also, took all those wasted words just to say: daddy issues
[removed]
So is this true for all kinds of transactional sex, or only explicitly ones with material benefits? I am aware, for instance, of people who get into a sexual relationship with someone they want to learn specific crafts or other techniques from, often quite openly. Does that imply the same sort of psychological vulnerabilities?
I know people who genuinely seem to measure love in pounds and pence. It’s not like they’re just out for everything they can get. It’s not a cynical or calculated thing. They simply conflate material support with love.
If they loved me they would buy me that! They must love me, they bought me this!
Im shocked, being vain and lacking morality linked to lack of self love
The title is using very passive language. It might be that the choice to engage in transactional sex CAUSES the damage. So the phrase “experience”, is not right. They don’t just “happen” to experience something. The psychological issue is the result of their choices.
Wow they managed to convince the last girl I liked to participate on a study that’s cool
Does that mean as cost of living goes up and housing etc becomes more insecure and more women have worse childhoods from a materialistic sense, the rate of sugar babies/sex workers will increase?
This comes as a complete chock to me. No one could have predicted this.
Poverty sucks too though, so yeah. Especially disbaled women have little other options.
Well, there’s always construction…
You mean they have the emotional intelligence of a carrot. Obviously.
Huge newsflash: People who trade a fake emotional connection for money might not be right.
Don’t let that sub see this.
It’s wild how much they’ve normalized and rationalized cliche dysfunction.
The “bowl” is a major echo chamber.
I can totally understand how this happens. Anecdotally, my single father was someone who was very neglectful but loved to throw money at me. If I needed emotional support or love or help, he would buy me something instead. I ended up going the opposite way – I prefer love and care over money or gifts, and I like gifts that are thoughtful rather than expensive – but I can totally see how someone with my type of upbringing could’ve gone the other way and seen love as something transactional.
Ah yes, why examine structural poverty and pressure and their effects on personality and the perception of the world, when you can jump straight to blaming the woman for her personality traits. The audience is being had. Anyone who has to trade intimacy for money is extremely strong despite their vulnerability. I do not blame anyone who has done what they needed to do to survive.
And these are the women Andrew Tate-like folks want to raise their children… Strong women equal strong children.
Very obvious correlation here is – if you are seeking a romantic or sexual partner to provide material support, presumably you need some material support. If you need some material support, you are more likely to be less wealthy. If you are less wealthy, you grew up less wealthy, and poorer kids grow up with a higher rate of negative childhood experiences and typically have lower self-esteem.
Is there any research aimed at men who pay for sexual favours, digital or physical?
here in latam we call this women “cariñosas”
basically the lack of father figure tends to build dependency into looking for older partner for money and company
meaning; the older guy is paying for the love of young girls here, a tale as old as time
the worse part it, we have internet today girl, if you’re willing to “make content” for money you shouldnt expect that to be erased from time, you cant work on anything else? thats fine, just accept it
I often wonder to what degree the simple fact of having “negative childhood experiences” functions as a sort of self-confounding variable.
If one has a childhood sufficiently challenging that gainful employment and emotional intimacy are themselves problematic, then “selling oneself” is more of a survival strategy than anything else.
A lot of marriages are still arranged for this reason. My parents stayed together for the money and because of their religion, not love.