these guys spend $5k/month on their girl?!
$5k/30 days = $166/day
hm.. might be worth it *IF* you're doing her every day
Tommy admitted he has sex with all of his sugar babies and that is part of the "big attraction"
and Tommy spends $150k/yr on his harem of Sugar Babies. :o
(how do i insert those yellow emoticons?!)
anyway, wouldnt it be cheaper just to rent a hooker?
How much are Vegas hookers?
How about the legal Clark County brothel hookers?
It isn't a "compliment to you as a male" if you have to pay her for the attention, you idiot.
Of course, that still doesn't explain why someone would pay an exorbitant amount of money just to pretend to be straight. He's retired, and already has a fortune (supposedly), so there wouldn't seem to be any need for a "cover story" to protect a job or ensure against being treated differently.
Tommy also reminds me of another older gentleman I know who lost his wife several years back and never recovered from that loss. He isn't gay, but he doesn't seem to enjoy the sexual presence of other women. He enjoys spending time with women, he just seems to have no desire to have sex with them. He would bee much like the last guy in the video piece. Someone who wants to have a woman on his arm to make him look good, but without the sexual acts to go along with it.
As for why someone would choose this, more expensive option, over prostitutes, or even call girls. I could see it because of the "permanent" nature of the relationship. You would always be showing up at events, parties, or whatever, with the same girl. Like having her on retainer or something.
Many older men, myself included, wish they could be "players". Most can't because they don't have the cash.
As you get older younger women--20-30 years younger-- who are lookers and are in your life in some way (say work)-- really make an old gent wish they could RE SET their lives and start again.
These guys are free enough ($$$$) to make the play (a temporary RESET!!). And are wise enough to know the futility of actually falling in "true romantic love" with someone very younger and keeping them happy as a spouse. I wouldn't do it any other way than portrayed in the video clip above on this post had I the ability $$$$ to do so and were inclined to do so.
That said I'm having a tough time swallowing the fact that it is a good thing for EVERY women who signs up. I am glad though that these women have the desire to make it anyway they can rather than giving into welfare medicaid and food stamps which has the risk of being a lifetime "occupation" once one starts down that road. They just might be giving it their best shot.
Therefore I respect both sides here.
All the old duffer needs to do to get Royally Screwed is enter a casino.
Gotta love brutal honesty.
For the mass majority of us, having a harem isn't something we can legally or financially afford. Although this isn't the technical definition of a harem, it's pretty close and sounds kickass.
Tommy's mannerisms, including his manner of speech, the way he walks, the way he stands, his facial expressions, etc, etc, remind me a GREAT deal of a gentleman that I know. A gay gentleman. I'm not saying Tommy is gay, but what better way to cover up your sexual lifestyle than by publicly using and admitting to using a "sugar daddy" website. He says he has sex with the girls, but that could be one of the lies. If he's paying $5k a month, I'm sure the girl would lie for him as well.Of course, that still doesn't explain why someone would pay an exorbitant amount of money just to pretend to be straight. He's retired, and already has a fortune (supposedly), so there wouldn't seem to be any need for a "cover story" to protect a job or ensure against being treated differently.
I knew an older man who worked for the military, and lived with another man in a scene straight out of "The Birdcage". His friend was literally flaming, and the house was decorated outrageously with phallic sculptures (just like the movie). Yet he was old school, and denied he was gay until he was in his 60's, even in the face of overwhelming evidence.
I don't see what the "discovery" is in this news report. I guess it is just the online aspect. But online activity doesn't create new relationships.
No way a "poor' SD could pull off such an arangement. Eventually someone (the SB most likely) is going to get hurt. And the SD will be off to the hoosegow!!
Or am I missing something here? LOL