Haha. I brought up sugar babies in another comment.

And yeah, there’s the thing of it. Let’s look at Leo the cradle robber again. It seems that it’s not him ending these relationships. It’s mostly the women. I don’t know if this is true or not as he’s never cranked my tractor and I don’t stalk celebrities anyways.

But that’s odd, isn’t it? Assuming it’s true? I would expect a sugar baby to stay in a relationship as long as it’s still mutually beneficial. I would not expect a sugar baby to give herself a shelf date of 25ish. Maybe I’m wrong on that, but it seems odd to me.

This suggests that these women entered into a relationship with him expecting one thing and he fully intended to deliver something else. Once they realized he never had any permanent inclinations or hopes, they moved on to find someone who does.

So now the question is, is he lying or manipulating them or are they not listening to him and thinking they’ll change him? Couldn’t say.

Someone else brought up the point that these women are never victims (a man, of course) because of the financial gain they enjoy and that’s why they dated the guy in the first place. Okay. Sure.

Well, I had my nut cracker boots laced up pretty tight for that one; he’s off still whimpering in a corner somewhere and I haven’t heard back from him.

Paraphrasing my response to that line of thinking, there’s no guarantee of that unless there’s an established sugar daddy/baby agreement in place that puts her in charge of the financial "gifts" she receives and you can be damned sure that if there isn’t and she asks for college tuition, for example, that man lose his shit and scream about whoring because she dared ask for money just to avoid being generous. Sure, he’ll plop down 30K for a diamond tennis bracelet, for his ego, but not for Harvard law school so she’ll have a future after the relationship ends. Just because someone has money does t mean they are generous with it. There are as many rich skinflint misers as there are poor ones (proportionally speaking).

When the relationship ends, he’ll ask for that bracelet back so it’s not a real gift, is it? If he doesn’t, you could sell it’s but never for as much as the cash gift would have been worth.

If you want a sugar baby, you need to admit you’re a sugar daddy and negotiate an agreement to satisfy you both. You need to conduct yourself like a honorable business man and not be underhanded about it. Otherwise, what you are is a pimp, looking to stable a pretty young girl or woman who is vulnerable in some way, benefitting off of her, and then tossing her out like trash. You’re a liar and a fraud or you would have been up front to start off with. You’re manipulating someone’s hopes for love. You’re a cad insisting on a certain integrity from your partner while never returning any of your own.

Zooming back in to cradle robbing Leo, I think his conduct earns a little scrutiny. His position in life marks him for it another way as well. Assuming he’s on the up and up and this is all coincidence, he’s been honest in his intent and never manipulated any of these women in any way... it is not wrong to use him as an example because he has chosen to live a somewhat public life. Highlighting to girls and young women that just because he’s on the up and up, most of these situations are not is not a bad thing. Julia Roberts faced the same criticism and scrutiny from Pretty Women and that was fair so you can’t say it’s one sided or vagina patriarchy. I don’t think society wants it’s young women and men thinking that if they prostitute themselves, a rich man will come and save them from the life and that will be their way out. It doesn’t happen.

Lastly, I’d like to point out that scam warnings, while often directed at the young, exist across all walks of life. Are you going to suggest that warnings about Nigerian Princes (which are also emotionally manipulative and play on people’s longings for love) are just the vagina patriarchy hellbent on loping off all phallic obstructions everywhere? What about the warnings to seniors about certain "senior communities"?

I don’t think it can be argued that the brains of those marks are fully developed and have enjoyed their fully functioning cranium for quite some time?

So why do people only lose their shit about scam warnings when the mark is a young woman who might be setting herself up for a hard fall because she longs for love? Why then is it "women are trying to punish men for being men" or whatever flavor-of-the-month bullshit they spout to protect the status quo so they can operate unchallenged? I cannot imagine this kind of push back against scammers who target older people, young men (you admit you yourself have criticized your govt for accepting 16 year olds into military service as you should), men looking for mail order brides, or any other walk of life.

There’s a definite double standard here. I’d say I’m shocked, but I am now a half centurion I’ve seen this dance before. Men call it the bitter dance. Okay. Sure.

If I don’t go take Jupiter for her morning walkin' around the blockin' she’s going to punch me in the face. I’ve been warned.