When eHarmony just seems a bit… prole-y
Do you have lots of money (men) or are you hot (women)? Then you should check out this dating website I saw advertised on the Age yesterday. I’m dubious about giving them additional advertising, but some of my screen shots have the name anyway, so… it’s sugardaddie.com.
Couple points: As I mentioned above, the site links rich men with hot single women. Notice how the ad doesn’t mention if the men are single or not. I suppose it could go either way: find a mate or be a glorified escort.
Going to the site, we see that users can choose if they are a woman looking for a ’sugar daddie’ (with ‘man’ provided helpfully in parentheses) or a man looking for a ’sugar babe’.
They’ve revamped the site since I first went there yesterday, when they were offering ‘quality’ women for ‘financially stable men.’ Today they have ‘beautiful, intelligent, and classy women & models.’ From the way its phrased it seems like they have this certain type of woman and then also models. I think it’s just strange English, but it’s the language to which we’re tied down.
Moving to testimonials, we meet a man who managed to find an ‘amazing, beautiful, kind, bright and tolerant woman who is 14 years younger.’
Good for him. I know my personality can be kind of… oh, let’s use the word ‘prickly’, but how insufferable must you be to list ‘tolerant’ in your top five attributes for a partner? What I really like is the picture at the top, where the pretty woman stares in adoration at her (presumably) rich new man.
My favorite thing about the site is that it (used to) offer to match you with ‘quality’ women. At various points on the site, they take a stab at implying the rich women might be members. The overall idea, however, as you might imagine, is hot chicks for rich guys. Check out their “our members” page (right). It says ’successful’ women, but the picture means ’scantily clothed’ women.
There’s nothing so wrong with all of this, I suppose. They’re just making a website for things that occur everyday. Might as well match up those willing to trade looks for cash and visa versa. I suppose the part I find computer-punchy is the idea that this is the ‘classy’ way to date. I’m all about doing whatever it is you do, but suggesting finding ‘quality’ women for rich men appalls me somehow. All I can imagine is some rich guy interrupting the first date appetizers to examine his date’s teeth.
The site says it’s all about ‘high caliber and attractive people.’ I guess what I have a problem with is the idea that the de-facto purchasing of women or the willingness to trade your body for riches somehow makes you more ‘high caliber’ or ‘attractive’ than the rest of us. Well, different standards I suppose.
Sphere: Related Content
December 17th, 2007 at 11:49 am
I love that it promotes itself as being for those who ‘recognize ambtion and success are traits of attraction’ and (as you point out) according to the picture on the members page you can apparently recognise an ambitious, succesful woman by the amount of cleavage she shows and the coy come-fuck-me look in her eyes.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:33 pm
i’ll admit, there are some mornings when the only thing that gets me out of bed and into the office is the possibility that, if i keep at it long enough, one day i too might qualify to, um, procure my own sugar babe. alas, it’s my american dream.
December 20th, 2007 at 7:04 am
hey if flaunting a niche type works for Jdate.com why should goldbricking whores be left out of the party?
December 21st, 2007 at 3:04 am
Couple more foot licking videos, Brent, and I’d imagine you’ll be well on your way. Get Junior to work!
December 21st, 2007 at 1:05 pm
i’m in chicago saturday, and i’ll bring my foot, um, but junior stays in new york. she’s a new yorker, alas.
December 21st, 2007 at 5:48 pm
Only Saturday? That’s, like, the worst day ever!