The XX Factor: What women really think.

"My First Client Was a Sugar Daddy Type"

In light of recent conversation here--"Do You Really Want a Sugar Daddy?", "Sugar Daddies We Love," "True Romance"--inspired by college senior "Melissa Beech"'s "My Sugar Daddy" story on the Daily Beast, I thought it would be interesting to hear from an expert. After all, since Slate has given a john a column, it's only fair a former sex worker gets to speak here, too. I asked my friend, blogger and retired courtesan Debauchette, what she thought of the piece and discussion. Is Beech a savvy romantic, a "sugar baby," or a prostitute in denial?

Debauchette writes:

"I read the Melissa Beech piece with interest, which discusses her relationship with a sugar daddy. I don't have much love for the term 'sugar daddy'--it's infantilizing and makes me think of tiaras and baby talk. That said, this 'daddy' aspect of the term is a reminder of where the power lies in this sort of arrangement. Sugar babies sleep with men for money and material perks, but when that perk is a credit card or an apartment in someone else's name, it results in financial dependency, not financial freedom. This is why I prefer prostitution.

My first client was a sugar daddy type. He was very charming, very kind, and very married, and when I met him, he offered a similar sort of arrangement. His reasoning was that if he couldn't offer commitment, the right thing to do would be to pay me for my time, time that might be better spent elsewhere. It was sort of a cost-benefit balancing act, and it worked because I never felt like I'd wasted my time with him. But unlike Beech's arrangement, I didn't want gifts or a monthly stipend. I wanted to be paid for time spent, like an attorney, or a therapist. And it worked. For the time we spent together, it felt as though we were two independent people put on equal footing with the exchange of cash, and that transaction freed us to have a very open, honest, and sexual relationship. Six years later, he remains one of my closest friends.

A friend of mine believes that every relationship involves a transaction, that everyone makes an emotional compromise for end goals, like marriage, or family, or financial stability, or a life that isn't spent alone. Personally, I don't believe that all relationships are transactional, but I do think it's common, and I think that might be why Beech's piece has provoked such a response. She appears to be committed to one man who's offered to cover her financial needs and wants, and her relationship developed from a clearly articulated transaction. The thing is, this doesn't just remind me of sex work. This could apply equally to marriage."

I couldn't agree more.