Not sure why I received a spam email about this particular site, but I did. And when I read the site, I had to write a post. (As usual, this is a few months after the fact.)

sugarbaby advertising mall agency pimp or something

The site is incredibly confused about its purpose, but this may have a lot to do with the mentality of the person behind it. It claims to be a sugardaddy/independent escort advertising mall/escort agency site. Further reading clarified things as it really just seems to be a site run by a rather dumb pimp.

His stellar attitude, motivational skills and deep understanding of the business are displayed on the employment page (mind you, this isn’t an agency!) as he explains that having clients paying good money just to sit/talk/cuddle isn’t going to happen and that he has no problem telling his advertisers/employees they’re not worth the rate they want. If I were a pimp, I would ensure my girls made as much as possible. (This also reminds me of another advertising site I’ve discussed.)

Which makes me wonder just how good his pimping skills are. Either that, or he’s simply making an accurate observation about the quality of his clientele, in which case, why bother? Be an indie and not only charge what your little heart desires (without having to give him a free piece of anything), but meet clients who do need the therapy or extended-romance and are willing to pay for it.

He reverses this thinking shortly after by telling girls that they’ll have many types of dates with the clients/SDs off this site, including ones without sex. You mean, ones where the client just pays her to talk and cuddle with him? Really??? But I thought that didn’t happen because he said it didn’t. Wait, my little blonde escort brain is all confused now.

how not to hire an escort

The squicky part begins where he assures potential clients/SDs looking at the model gallery that he has met every girl in person and “personally verified her skills and abilities” He also mentions that he employs these girls, though he just finished explaining how this wasn’t an agency (my head’s starting to hurt). But let’s go back to the in-person interview.

Most reputable agencies will indeed meet their employees in person. Truly good agencies will begin a relationship with each of their employees. Most escort agencies are small businesses with relatively few people involved, leading to everyone getting to know each other. Nothing wrong with it, I think it’s good business. The sole reason it sometimes isn’t good business is because of stupid laws, not because the concept itself isn’t sound.

A good agency never requires casting couch sessions with the employees. Never ever ever. When someone states something like how he “personally verified her skills and abilities” it always makes me wonder if he’s somehow the world’s greatest expert on the human sexual experience and can therefore judge appropriately. If he is, then I’d pay to have a session with him and learn something. If he isn’t…then why does he think he’s entitled to coerce his employees into giving him a freebie? I’m not pointing a finger at just this man, I know full well this is a popular option for men involved in the business, even peripherally (I could go on and on about review-coercion with hobbyists but I won’t right now).

He describes the interview process, which begins completely rationally. Meeting at Starbucks, chatting and answering real escort-related interview questions — all sounds normal. It starts heading south when he then takes the prospective employee/whateever to a hotel room to shoot photos. (My first thought is: if those pix on the site are the ones he took, please hire a professional. My second thought is: maybe those are the pro-pix and the pix he’s talking about are “private” ones.)

After he gets all turned on by taking crappy pictures, he has sex with her. He warns that any girl not willing to have free sex with him doesn’t get hired. Please note he’s offering a job but only if the interviewee has sex with him. She cannot earn income without having free sex with him first, regardless of her feelings toward him. If she does not know another way of earning money as an escort then she’s stuck taking his offer: coerced sex or no work.

He not only considers himself the girl’s first client with the agency/whatever (note to him: clients pay with cash), he writes a review of this first meeting for her profile page. This begs the question if he somehow thinks he is a typical client and therefore interacting with him is tantamount to interacting with all his clients. Coercing sex from escorts is not quite the same as actually being an escort and interacting with actual paying clients. Clients pay with cash. He only offers coerced sex, crap photos and a coffee at Starbucks. (Yeah, my landlord is always impressed when I give her Starbucks instead of a check on rent-day.)

manufactured consent, coercive sex

He charges men a fee to join the non-agency-agency/sugardaddy site. So, basically, gentleman, you’re paying a guy to have coerced sex with the lady you may desire for yourself. Every single girl on the site has had coercive sex with the owner of the site. I’m not going to go so far as calling it a gallery of rape, but the dividing line isn’t that big either. Manufactured consent isn’t anywhere near the same league as just a plain old straight up “yes.”

This article, written by a young man, defines coercive sex well:

Some victim/survivors are coerced into having sex or being sexual. The guy cares about the person he’s with, but cares about the sex more. Her saying “No” is ignored — he continues to ask and ask until her defenses crumble — she might even say, “Yes,” just to get it over with. Her “consent” is therefore coerced and “manufactured” by him.

Every woman has had coercive sex: where you give into the guy just to shut him up or because you don’t want the whining to escalate into actual violence (aka “real” rape). Every single woman I know has had this situation. I guess there are men for whom this is a victory or reaffirmation of his sexiness or…god only knows what the thought-process behind this is. I can’t imagine why anyone wants to have sex with a partner they badgered into it and clearly does not wish to be participating, but then again, I’m female. My perspective is quite different as far as matters of consent and desire go.

I’m obviously a very easy girl. I offer sex in a variety of circumstances — all of which are my choosing. I do not want a situation where my job, income or anything about my life hangs in the balance. That’s not consent. For example, a situation that comes down to “Have sex with me after I took compromising photos of you and I’ll allow you to make income” is not a situation where my genuine consent is part of it. Genuine consent would not involve a job interview at all; and no discussion or worry about my income runs through my or my partner’s heads. Just want to make that very clear to readers.

a quick note on paid consent

This could really veer off into a protracted discussion about being paid to consent to sex (i.e. with clients). A lot of escorts, myself included, would stop the session if we really really did not want to have sex with that particular client (girls who go ahead and do it “just for the money” also tend to end up with misgivings and a lesson learned — but neither do they feel it was the client’s fault if they pushed past their own doubts). Also, we’re the ones who tend to initiate sex. It’s very rare, in my experience, that a client propositions me or attempts to get intimate without me obviously making the first move. And sometimes, clients make it clear after I’ve made a move that they’re not really feeling like it. Clients have boundaries and are also capable of making the decision to give consent.