STUDENT SUGAR DATING: SUGAR BABIES' PERCEPTIONS OF THEIR DECISIONS TO BEGIN, CONTINUE, OR DESIST
Taylor Ann Lenze
A Thesis
Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF ARTS
December 2020
Committee:
Hyeyoung Bang, Advisor
Kristie A. Foell
Christy Galletta Horner
© 2020
Taylor Ann Lenze
All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT
Hyeyoung Bang, Advisor
Sugar dating is defined as a mutually beneficial relationship between two partners where
one, the sugar baby, is compensated by the other, the sugar momma or daddy, for his/her time.
Sugar relationships are rapidly increasing in popularity among college students as a way to earn
money yet there is a dearth of scholarly research on this trend. Despite parallels with the sex
industry, sugar dating is not necessarily sex work. This thesis describes how sugar dating
websites appeal to students, and it explores student sugar baby experiences and reflections on
their decisions to start sugar dating, and then to continue or desist upon finishing school. The
study has two parts. Firstly, content analysis of the leading sugar dating websites in the United
States and Germany, seeking.com and mysugardaddy.de respectively, offers contextual
information on the appeal of sugar dating to students in countries with very different cultural and
legal norms around sex and sexuality. Secondly, eight semi-structured interviews with sugar babies, examined using interpretive phenomenological analysis, explore student sugar dating experiences. The websites revealed three main appeals to potential sugar babies: money and luxury, mentorship, and sex appeal. All of these topics were mentioned in the interviews; however, the participants focused especially on their worldview and potential conflicts of sugar dating, the dangers and drawbacks they experienced, and their personal agency. Sugar dating is understood as enabling financial stability. Middle-class and educationally privileged, the young women interviewed are primarily from a generation accustomed to online dating and delayed life milestones like home ownership and marriage, saddled with unrepayable student debt, and without expectation of job security. Their decisions to begin, continue or even quit sugar dating reflect their strategies to succeed in this anxious environment. The life they are creating does not iv necessarily seem socially connected, and reveals potential isolation, yet sugar dating has become a normalized endurance strategy. These findings underscore a lack of stability or financial security in the United States faced by many students and graduates, not just those who pursue sugar dating.
v
To Phil, for seeing me through. vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am immensely grateful to the many people who helped and supported me throughout the research and writing of this thesis. Firstly, I would like to thank Dr. Bang, my thesis advisor, as well as my committee members, Dr. Foell and Dr. Horner, for their advice, direction, and support, and not only during the research process but also throughout my master’s program, in the formation of the initial proposal, and during the entire writing process. Without Dr. Bang’s reassurance during my first introduction of the topic in class, I do not think I would have been gone further with the topic. I also want to thank Dr. Anna Müller for her patience, encouragement, advice and belief in me. Without her questioning my assumptions, asking tough questions, checking in with me, and redirecting me when I was lost with analysis, the final thesis would have been far shallower and more disjointed. I would also like to thank Julia Höfferer for her listening ear, even after the COVID-19 pandemic forced her to return to Austria. Her enthusiasm and conviction helped ease the transition to graduate school in Ohio.
This current thesis looks very different than it did in the middle steps after finishing preliminary research. I had created a stigmatizing sex work narrative which had no connection to my actual interviewees. I am especially grateful to one of my participants, Marie, for pointing out my assumptions and the harmful ways I was enabling stigma. Above all I want to thank all the brave women who took time and personal risk to trust me with their stories. Without their words and experiences, this thesis could not have existed. vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION ...... 1
Background to the Problem...... 3
Theoretical Framework ...... 5
Significance of the Study ...... 6
Problem and Purpose of the Study ...... 7
Definition of Terms ...... 8
LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 10
What is Sugar Dating? ...... 10
Is Sugar Dating Sex Work ...... 11
History of the Culture Surrounding Sex Work in the West ...... 14
Internet, Personal Computer, and Phone Technology Advances ...... 15
Western Culture and the Middle Class ...... 17
Middle Class Sex Workers and Authenticity ...... 18
Late Capitalism and Neoliberalism ...... 19
Risks and Dangers Associated with Sex Work ...... 20
Disease and Sickness ...... 21
Bodily Harm and Violence ...... 21
Legal Recourse ...... 22
Psychological Health ...... 23
Whore Stigma...... 24
viii
Prevalence of Sex Work and Sugar Dating Among Students ...... 25
Literature on Exiting Sex Work ...... 28
Motivations to Continue ...... 28
Resume and Future Job Prospects ...... 30
Process of Exit or Continuation ...... 31
Sex Work in Germany vs. the United States ...... 33
Legal Atmosphere in Germany and the United States ...... 33
Cultural Environment around Sex Work in Germany vs. the United States ... 35
Student Sex Work in Germany and the United States ...... 36
Theoretical Framework: Bronfenbrenner ...... 37
Bioecological Model ...... 38
Bronfenbrenner and Adults ...... 39
Human Agency ...... 39
PPCT Model and Proximal Process ...... 41
Additional Theoretical Underpinnings ...... 42
Chapter Summary ...... 42
METHODS ...... 44
Conceptual Framework ...... 44
Research Questions ...... 44
Methodology: Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) ...... 45
Bronfenbrenner and Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis ...... 46
Research Design ...... 47
Participants ...... 49 ix
Data Collection ...... 51
Snowball Sampling ...... 51
Sample Size ...... 52
Mental Health of Participants ...... 53
Analysis Procedures ...... 54
Content Analysis: American and German Sugar Dating Website Appeal ...... 54
Interviews: Student Sugar Baby Experiences and Reflections ...... 56
Coding ...... 57
Trustworthiness ...... 60
Social Desirability ...... 60
Research Issues and Limitations ...... 61
Chapter Summary ...... 61
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ...... 63
Chapter Overview ...... 63
Introduction ...... 63
Sugar Dating Website and Themes ...... 64
Layout ...... 64
Sugar Dating Website Allures ...... 66
Money or Luxury...... 67
Mentorship ...... 68
Sex Appeal ...... 68
Five Additional Themes on Mysugardaddy.de ...... 69
Limited Representation, Sexism, and Disempowerment ...... 70 x
Website Appeal to Students...... 72
Discussion...... 73
Interview Themes ...... 76
Views on Sex Work: Cognitive Dissonance and Potential Conflicts ...... 77
Intersection with Sex Work ...... 78
Discussion: Sex Work ...... 81
Personal Ethical and Moral Code ...... 83
Discussion: Personal Ethics ...... 85
Change in Outlook on Relationships and Sugar Dating ...... 86
Discussion: Change in Outlook ...... 88
Friendships ...... 89
Discussion: Friendships ...... 92
Family ...... 94
Discussion: Family ...... 97
Religion ...... 98
Discussion: Religion ...... 100
Personal Romantic Relationship ...... 101
Discussion: Other Romantic Relationships ...... 104
Synthesis ...... 105
Dangers and Drawbacks ...... 106
Stigma ...... 106
Discussion: Stigma ...... 107
Virtual Harm ...... 109 xi
Discussion: ...... Virtual Harm 110
Financial Harm ...... 111
Discussion: Financial Harm ...... 112
Emotional Exhaustion ...... 112
Discussion: Emotional Exhaustion ...... 113
Racism ...... 114
Discussion: Racism ...... 116
Violent Harm ...... 117
Discussion: Violent Harm ...... 119
Synthesis ...... 121
Human Agency ...... 121
Finances ...... 121
Discussion: Finances ...... 126
Mentorship ...... 127
Discussion: Mentorship ...... 130
Level of Comfort with Sexuality ...... 131
Discussion: Sexuality ...... 133
Female Pleasure and Power: You Get a Rush From It” ...... 134
Discussion: Female Pleasure ...... 135
Personal Need for Control ...... 137
Discussion: Need for Control ...... 140
Student Status ...... 143
Discussion ...... 144 xii
CONCLUSION ...... 149
Summary of Findings ...... 149
Theoretical Implications ...... 150
Practical Implications ...... 151
Limitations ...... 153
Implications for Further Research ...... 154
REFERENCES ...... 155
APPENDIX A. INTERVIEW PROTOCOL ...... 166
APPENDIX B. INFORMED CONSENT ...... 168
APPENDIX C. IRB APPROVAL ...... 171
xiii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1 Screen Capture of Seeking.com ...... 65
2 Screen Capture of Mysugardaddy.de...... 66
3 Side-by-Side Comparison of Seeking.com and Mysugardaddy.de Banner Images ..... 70
4 Screen Capture from Seeking Arrangement’s Sugar Baby University Campaign...... 72
5 Interview Themes Relating to Participant Decisions ...... 146
xiv
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1 Participant Characteristics ...... 50
2 Participant Fields of Study and Current Employment ...... 51
3 Codes Generated from Seeking.com and Mysugardaddy.de ...... 58
4 Initial and Consolidated Themes from Interview Analysis ...... 59
5 Overarching Themes and the Topics Within Each Overarching Theme ...... 77
1
INTRODUCTION
“What even is sugar dating? Is that what it’s called?” Sugar dating is a relatively new
phenomenon which takes many forms, but it is essentially an arrangement between two or more
people where the one party offers gifts, money, or mentorship in exchange for time or company
(often sex) from the other party. Stereotypically and statically this arrangement is between an older man and younger woman, often a university student (Nayar, 2017). Sometimes the arrangement is blatantly paid sex, but other times it is a deep platonic friendship. In the United
States, millions of students participate in sugar dating (Sugar Baby University: 5th Anniversary,
2020) and scholarly attention has arisen, matched by the proliferation of sugar dating blogs and websites and increased media attention.
The experiences students have sugar dating are very diverse and the sugar babies often reject the label of sex work and understand their relationships in more relational terms. Yet despite this, sugar dating is usually addressed in scholarly literature within the framework of sex work (Miller, 2011; Motyl, 2013; Reed, 2015; Scull, 2020). Because of the dearth of research exclusively focused on student sugar babies, this present thesis follows the precedent of earlier
research by considering possible overlaps between sex work and sugar dating. It does not,
however, imply that sugaring is equivalent to sex work.
Students who do sex work often posit their arrangements as a short-term way to put themselves through school and plan on quitting upon graduation (Lantz, 2005) but research reveals trapping factors which bar exit (Jones, 2019; Sanders & Hardy, 2015). Sugar dating likewise may be seen as a temporary way to pay for school that later is hard to quit. Sex work brings a host of potential dangers (and also potential advantages), including a heavy social stigma, and students face unique concerns (Haeger & Deil-Amen, 2010; Weitzer, 2009). Student 2
sugar babies may face similar determents and advantages which complicate this decision to quit
or continue after graduation. What attributions do they themselves offer when understanding and
explaining their decisions? The silence around this group of students, as well as the implication
that all sugar dating is sex work, have the potential to heavily marginalize and stigmatize this
student population. More information on their experiences and motivations is necessary so that
universities can be better equipped to support these students. The present study begins to answer
the question of to what students attribute their sugar dating decisions.
Additionally, culture and society play a large role in stigma, legal rights, and perceptions
of sugar dating. The graduated students interviewed in this research were all middle class and
from the eastern half of the United States. The research thus emphasizes the attributions that
female sugar babies in a very specific cultural context (with specific understandings and norms
around sex and sexuality) offer for their decisions and probes whether or not the benefits and
drawbacks they identify align with the promises of the biggest sugar dating websites in the
United States. A cultural comparison to sugar dating in Germany, where the legal and social
implications of sugar dating and sexuality in general are different, is included to deepen the
understanding of sugar dating as a global phenomenon.
In order to understand the environments within which students make their decisions and
the elements they take into consideration, Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model and Process-
Person-Context-Time (PPCT) models are used to differentiate and identify layers of influence in
the participants’ lives, such as friendships, family, work and school, and the interaction of these
factors over time. In order to glimpse this rich, multifaceted information, eight participants were interviewed in-depth and the interviews were analyzed with a six-step process using interpretive phenomenological analysis. 3
This study focuses on the perceptions of young, American women who sugar date. These
female, middle-class college students attribute their starting sugar dating to friendships, and they explain their continued participation post-graduation as motivated by finances and mentorship and contingent on them not having a significant other.
Background to the Problem
Sugar dating comes with potential risks and it is possible that some of the risks sex workers face also impact student sugar babies, including risks to health, physical safety, legal protection, and mental health, and the risk of increasing dependency on sex work making stopping difficult if not impossible. Less tangibly but still important is the risk that the time and
emotional energy that sugar dating requires could cause harm to healthy non-sugar relationship building, personal development, and personal ownership in building one’s own life.
Bodily health is a concern in countries where transactional sex has been correlated with highly elevated chances of contracting STDs and HIV (Ajayi & Somefun, 2019; Roberts et al.,
2010). Luke (2005) suggested that sugar babies feel less power in a relationship and are thus less likely to insist upon safe sex. Concerns over physical safety are also common among sex workers. Stalking, hostile work environments, and a heightened chance of domestic violence or homicide are all frequently cited risks (Kennedy, 2016). To complicate this, the legal system and those in positions of authority are not always sympathetic to what sex workers may endure.
Police are sometimes seen as aggressive and vengeful instead of helpful (Bernstein, 2007a) and the risk of being legally cited for prostitution (and thus limiting future job opportunities) may deter sex workers from accessing help. Additionally, many medical personnel may harbor stereotypes toward sex workers, deterring sex workers from seeking medical help if hurt (Farley,
2004). 4
Mental health may improve or decline through working in the sex industry. Sex work may boost the worker’s self-esteem though the feeling of helping people (Weitzer, 2009), learning to set boundaries, and saying no (Bernstein, 2007a). However, workers can suffer heavily from social or internalized stigma (Haeger & Deil-Amen, 2010; Jones, 2019; Kennedy,
2016; Sinacore et al., 2014). There can also be stress from fear and secrecy (Kennedy, 2016), emotional exhaustion (Haeger & Deil-Amen, 2010), social isolation (Bernstein, 2007b), and vulnerability (Lantz, 2005). For students, stigma and stress could hurt school performance
(Sinacore et al., 2014).
In the case of student sex workers, it is unclear whether students become trapped within the sex industry or choose to stay or leave. Possible trapping factors have been suggested in research but not yet adequately understood (Sanders & Hardy, 2015, p. 762). The weight of the aforementioned risks become additionally concerning if sex work is not a freely chosen lifestyle decision but rather initially chosen out of desperation to survive financially as a student. It is possible that student sugar babies would feel trapped sugar dating.
Lastly, other, less obvious risks to personal relationships and personal development may be present. It is possible that the emotional labor (Hochschild, 1985) invested in clients can impact the amount of emotional engagement the sugar baby or sex worker still can offer friends and family. Personal development, identity exploration and learning occur through romantic relationships and friendships and this may be hampered by transactional, constructed relationships. Because intimacy is important in Erikson’s (1959) developmental stages for people between 18 and 40, sex work for college students may interfere with personal intimacy and commitments and thus increase isolation. Turning to transactional relationships may be a way of 5
relinquishing ownership over one’s own circumstances and life and distancing oneself from the
harder task of achieving intimacy in settings where one might be rejected and hurt.
Theoretical Framework
Sugar dating as a category, like sex work, is diverse. The differences and nuances are
important in addressing whether or not the risks sex workers face also impact student sugar
babies. Students who sugar date make their decisions in a rich context of relationships, work,
school, home, social communities, needs, wants, and life experiences. When a student makes a
decision, such as to begin, continue or quit sugar dating, personal agency, which is partially a
product of the person’s environment, is acted out upon the person’s environment. National
culture and socioeconomic class also play a role. In order to encompass all of these aspects of
student sugar babies’ lives, Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory and the PPCT model of
human development informed the design of the present research. Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological
theory shows how people are influenced by their environment, from the closest level of the
immediate family to the broadest level like nation. Bioecological theory emphasizes the impact
that different layers of environment have on the person, but PPCT highlights the person’s agency
as well as the influence of context and time. Sugar dating is an example of environmental
behavior adaptation based on the needs and wants of the student in the environment and his or
her ability to achieve these desires. The motivations and decisions made upon graduating and after may be dependent not only on the students but also on their bioecological circumstances, such as financial stability, job prospects, social support, living arrangements, and goals and desires.
Erikson laid out eight stages of human personality development from infancy to old age:
trust vs. mistrust, autonomy vs. shame, initiative vs. guilt, industry vs. inferiority, identity vs. 6 role confusion, intimacy vs. isolation, generativity vs. stagnation, and ego integrity vs. despair
(Scheck, 2005). Successful completion of the conflict central to each stage results in acquiring the following virtues respectively: hope, will, purpose, competence, fidelity, love, care, and wisdom. The women sugar dating in this study are in the young adulthood stage of intimacy vs isolation because they are between the ages of 18 and 40. The successful completion of this stage requires the formation of loving, healthy relationships in order to experience safety, care and make commitments (Scheck, 2005). Not doing this results in isolation and loneliness.
Significance of the Study
Studying student sugar babies in their bioecological context offers a deep understanding of their lives and contextualizes their motivations and choices and provides a method of judging which environment elements mirror the sex industry and may result in risk. With over three million student sugar babies in the United States alone, universities are benefiting from money through tuition payments earned in what many see as a parallel sex industry. Though a causal link cannot be quantitively determined, sugar dating is advertised as a temporary solution to unachievable tuition payments (Padawer, 2009). If the cost of education pressures students into a possibly risky means of survival, research into its extent and potential harms (or lack thereof) is needed (Roberts, Bergström, & LaRooy, 2010) because universities which put students in this position have a responsibility to consider the students’ welfare (Ajayi & Somefun, 2019; Sagar et al., 2015, 2016).
Understanding the student sex worker experience is a vital step to integrating these students into the university community and to equipping staff to serve their unique needs, including mental health support handing stigma, stress and managed identities, academic support that does not further stigmatize or isolate them, and safe and accepting university atmosphere 7
where their work identity does not have to be hidden for fear of legal or social repercussions
(Sager et al., 2016). Similarly, understanding the student sugar baby experience is vital to
knowing how to best serve this student population. The present thesis works to continue breaking
the silence around student sugar dating by exploring the stories of women who sugar dated and
highlighting their voices and opinions. Without understanding the self-identifications,
experiences, and voices of these students, universities are not be able to best serve and support
this part of the student body. And yet in spite of this clear need, there is still a dearth of research into sugar relationships (Scull, 2020).
Problem and Purpose of the Study
It is unknown whether students sugar date out of curiosity or desperation and whether they feel free deciding to continue or quit. My research explored the attributions graduated
student sugar babies offer when describing their decision to continue or stop sugar dating and
looked at the influence of country and economic class context. This study explored the question
of whether students were motivated out of financial desperation (and thus being exploited) or
whether it was a lifestyle choice, as the largest website (seeking.com) suggests. Based on this
knowledge, universities can better support students and further quantitative research can be
conducted to test and generalize my findings.
There were two distinct aims for this research. Firstly, contextual information on the
motivating factors and environment in relation to sugar dating was gathered. Two websites
which facilitate sugar dating were analyzed to answer the question of how and why sugar dating websites appeal to students in the United States and Germany. Online platforms which organize
these arrangements are sources of information about why students initially begin and what may
encourage them to continue sugaring. The German and American sites reflect differences in 8
sugar dating in countries with very different cultural and legal norms around sex and sexuality.
Secondly, semi-structured interviews with graduated students investigated their
experiences sugar dating. The women reflected on the roles of their family, friends, economic
situation, and religion as well as their own personal attributes, beliefs and goals in relation to
both their attraction to sugar dating and in their decisions to either continue or desist upon
graduation.
Definition of Terms
“Students” are defined as all people enrolled at the university or college level regardless
of age and traditional or nontraditional enrollment status. “Sex work” is here defined as the broad
overarching category encompassing any sale of any sexual service for money or other benefit.
This includes prostitution, escorting, stripping, exotic dancing, camming, pornography, erotic
massage, and any other compensated sexual service. “Prostitution” is the direct act of
exchanging sex for money or compensation (Reed, 2015). The word connotates criminality,
social marginalization, and immorality and thus is generally avoided except when necessary for
clarity or precision, as in legal discussions (McMillan et al., 2018). “Sugar dating” is the
exchange of time and/or sexual services in exchange for gifts or money (Kennedy, 2016).
Usually this agreement is between a younger, financially unstable woman and an older, wealthier
man, however agreements not always reflect these age and gender roles (Reed, 2015).
“Sugaring” is the act of sugar dating. A “sugar baby” is the person being compensated, whereas a
“sugar parent,” “sugar daddy,” or “sugar momma” is the person offering compensation. The term
“sugar bowl” refers to the lifestyle of sugaring. To be “in the sugar bowl” or “go back to the
bowl” means that the person is currently sugar dating or looking for a new sugar relationship. 9
“Vanilla,” when used in the sugaring context, describes non-sugar dating relationships or situations.
10
LITERATURE REVIEW
Sugar dating, a form of compensated, arranged companionship, is not necessarily sex
work. Because of the many parallels between the two categories, sugar dating is commonly
researched in conjunction with sex work, however, and thus this paper is also situated within that
comparison. Sex workers face many risks through their work and quitting is possibly more
difficult the longer someone works in the sex industry. The differences between Germany (where
sex work is legalized) and the United States (where it is primarily criminalized) reveal the unique
challenges sex workers face within different legal and cultural environments. Bronfenbrenner’s
bioecological theory explores the impact environments have on the individual and Erikson’s
theory of the eight stages of development highlights the developmental conflicts university students who work as sex workers may face as young adults.
What is Sugar Dating?
Sugar dating is increasingly popular in the English-speaking world. By comparing profile numbers against current student numbers, Daly (2017) found that in Canada, the equivalent of
12% of the students studying in 2017 had used Seeking Arrangement, theoretically to finance their studies. In 2020, there were over 3 million student sugar babies registered in the United
States on Seeking Arrangement (Sugar Baby University: 5th Anniversary, 2020). In the Midwest alone, Stoll (2017) found that 7% of her survey participants (made up primarily of students) had participated in sugar dating. Whether to fund school or life, the number of students pursuing sugar dating is still steadily rising. Despite (or because of) the COVID-19 pandemic and social distancing measures, Seeking Arrangement reported a 77% increase in new users in the first two weeks of April 2020 (Rademacher & Snow, 2020). Elsewhere this trend seems less apparent. In 11
Germany, where university tuition is free to citizens and sex work legalized, sugar dating is not a
prominent topic.
Despite, or perhaps because of the rise in popularity, a single, clear definition of sugar
dating is actually tricky to pin down. As Petter (2013) phrased it in an article published in the
Independent, the term is often described “opaque language” and “shrouded in ambiguity” rather
than being plainly defined. In theory, sugar dating describes a relationship where one partner
(most often an older, wealthier and male) provides for another partner (typically young and
female) who in turn offers time and companionship (Nayar, 2017). A registered trademark for
Seeking Arrangement, “mutually beneficial relationships,” encompasses both elements—
relational (time or sex) and benefits (financial or other incentives). It works to allow both
participants to “get what they want when they want it” (SeekingArrangement: How It Works, n.d.).
Sugar dating has been defined in scholarly literature as companionship and intimacy in
return for financial compensation (Motyl, 2013; Nayar, 2017). This definition is also broad,
however. Paid companionship is legal and socially acceptable. Babysitters, caregivers, and even
therapists serve a companionship role in addition to their guiding role. Yet intimacy (if sexual) in
return for money (or gifts) comes close to the common definition of prostitution which is
potentially prosecutable in much of the United States (Motyl, 2013) and must be registered in
Germany.
Is Sugar Dating Sex Work?
Sugaring is not defined in the present thesis as sex work, despite often being
academically and popularly defined as such. Sex work cannot be ignored, however, because
literature on sugar dating and literature on sex work heavily overlap, sex work arises in the 12
interviews for this research and themes may have relevance across these two categories. Much
sugar dating research concerns itself explicitly with the connection to sex work. Reed’s (2015) dissertation on sugar dating works exclusively within the frame of sex workers. Miller’s (2011) research focuses on US prostitution law in regards to sugar dating. Motyl (2013) writes explicitly about student sugar dating as sex work. Scull’s (2020) research on sugar dating relational scripts organizes arrangements based on whether or not they would be considered prostitution. Sugar dating research which doesn’t choose sex work as its focus still includes a lengthy discussion about the previous research and present author’s stance. Daly’s (2017) thesis on sugar dating perceptions begins with a conversation about student sex work. Stoll’s (2017) dissertation on online dating states that such “dime dating” (sugar dating) arrangements are “fundamentally different from prostitution” (p. 13). She includes a section where she writes about how these relationships are usually negatively viewed by society as linked to prostitution. Cordero (2015) is
highly critical about the connection between sugar dating and sex work, yet explicitly has as her
second main research objective the question of why this narrative is so pervasive. In related
African research, sex work in terms of prostitution is rarely mentioned. However transactional
sex, unsafe sex practices and power differentials are investigated in relation to sugar dating
(Ajayi & Somefun, 2019; Choudhry et al., 2014; Luke, 2005; Shefer et al., 2012). One exception
is Masvawure’s (2010) article on Zimbabwe which mentions prostitution twice.
Additionally, research focused on sex work sometimes include mentions of sugar dating.
Kennedy’s (2016) dissertation on sex work and the internet makes frequent mentions of sugar
dating, which is included in her definition of sex work, Hammond (2019) argues against
separating sugar dating from the larger sex work category, and Jones’s (2019) research on
student sex workers included one sugar baby interviewee. This is not to imply that all recent sex 13
work research includes mentions of sugar dating, however, and many articles focused on student
sex work don’t mention it at all, but the two categories often overlap.
This leads to the conundrum of framing sugar dating in another way because the
preponderance of research in this vein often makes parsing out the nuance difficult. Additionally,
literature on student sex work can be compared to sugar dating to probe the dissimilarities. Due to these factors, an overview of student sex work, in addition to articles focused just on sugar dating, is important to the sugar dating literature review. This does not imply that sugaring is sex
work, however, but rather it acknowledges the ways the two intersect.
Sugaring has been called “a new facet” of the sex industry (Hammond, 2019, p. 1). Reed
(2015) refers to sugar dating as “college student prostitution” or “student sex work” and notes
that although it is not clear legally whether sugaring can be prosecuted as such, it is often
considered prostitution by the media and society (p. 5). Miller (2011) equates sugar dating to
prostitution and argues that sugar babies would be prosecuted like street sex workers except for
classism inherent in the justice system and the view that students are “high class.”
Daly uses this same evidence to argue conversely that sugaring is not sex work. Sugar
relationships are transactional. At times they may resembles patriarchal relationship and at times
sex work, even in the a less overt form of compensated companionship, like escorting. However,
it would be grossly incorrect to equate all sugar dating with prostitution because people in sugar
relationships are rarely arrested for sex work (Daly, 2017). In the form upon which the leading
sugar dating websites overtly insist (a mutually beneficial agreement for companionship in return
for compensation), people engaging in sugar dating cannot be legally prosecuted for prostitution.
Scull (2020) attempts to answer this conundrum by classifying sugar dating into seven types and
arguing that just one type is prostitution. She argues against the dichotomy of sex work and 14
normal relationships, saying that all relationships are in some way transactional, especially
traditional patriarchal courtships and marriages. Indeed, the lines between sugaring, dating, and
sex work become very vague.
Motyl, in her 2013 dissertation, mimics Scull’s method in that she dissects the legality of sugar dating arrangements by classifying them in three groups. Basing her argument on the definition of prostitution in the federal Model Penal Code, she says that because sugaring operates under the proposed construct of a relationship rather than a business, sugaring in its website-defined theoretical form cannot be regulated under the Model Penal Code as prostitution in most cases. In practice, however, sugaring does not follow this formula at all. The cases which are directly transactional (“a frank exchange of sex for money” on a pay-per-meet basis) would indeed be considered prostitution under the Model Penal Code (Motyl, 2013, p. 945). By refusing to categorize sugar dating as sex work, the similarities between the two categories are ignored and valuable research and knowledge thus is limited (Hammond, 2019). Because of this, it may be possible to reference the sex industry for the sake of comparison, but because sugar dating is not necessarily sex work, necessary distinctions must be made so as to not falsely lump it into an already diverse, large category.
History of the Culture Surrounding Sex Work in the West
Scholarly articles and popular press on sex work sometimes begin with banal generalizations about the “oldest profession” (Gilderman, 2017) or about how it has existed “in all epochs of civilization” (Brents & Sanders, 2010) or “throughout history” (Immordino &
Russo, 2015). Speculation and ancient history are less relevant to the current discussion than the impact of modern technology, social culture, and economics on the sex industry and on the women and men who are involved either as providers or consumers. 15
Internet, Personal Computer, and Phone Technology Advances
In the 1980s, the market for prostitution had already made its way online (Cunningham &
Kendall, 2011). In 1993, illicit photographs appeared; for example, Playboy sued a website for publishing a downloadable scan of its images online (Kennedy, 2016). In 1994, internet browsing software was available to consumers, and online photos, including ones of a sexual nature, became increasingly common. The first known website dedicated to prostitution was published in 1996 (Cunningham & Kendall, 2011). The rise of the internet made buying and selling sexual products and services more accessible because the anonymity and hiddenness of internet usage eliminated shame as a barrier (Bernstein, 2007b). The role of technology, especially the internet, continues to be a topic of discussion in popular press articles like “The oldest profession evolves—how the web transformed prostitution,” republished in 2017 in the
Daily Beast (Gilderman, 2017).
Realistically, technology did not change or end existing sex work completely, but instead augmented it by offering different meeting points for customers and providers (Cunningham &
Kendall, 2011). The wider availability of references and reviews for both providers and buyers increased the safety and confidence of the people entering into transactions (Cunningham &
Kendall, 2011). While word of mouth lists of dangerous or unpleasant purchasers existed before the digital age, the internet created wider platforms to disseminate these lists and share general safety information.
The internet concretely changed sex work (from the provider’s position) in three ways: increased fellowship, increased advertising possibilities, and more easily accessible knowledge and skill transfer (Kennedy, 2016). Not only were sites like Craigslist and Backpage thriving in the 2000s, but online communities on sites like Tumbler or Reddit connected isolated sex 16
workers to a larger community and gave them a platform to speak, anonymously or under a
name. Sites like Slixa.com and ErosGuide.com also offered both listing opportunities for
providers as well as tips, information, blogs, and the ability to search for clients (Kennedy,
2016). Of the fourteen types of sex work Kennedy identified, all but one (street prostitution) was
impacted by the internet.
The internet and computer technology also indirectly impacted the sex industry through
the role these technologies played in the formation of a postindustrial economy in the United
States. Two implications of this technological economic revolution are applicable here: the
continued stratification of economic power along the gender divide, and the possibility of
middle-class sex work. As elite professions were increasingly hard to achieve and the economy
was instead producing an ever increasing sector of part-time, low paid, insecure and temporary positions, women found themselves pushed into the latter jobs (Bernstein, 2007b). In no way does this create a causal relationship where women turn to sex work because of the job market,
but indeed impacts women’s opportunities, opinions and motivations, as evidenced in many
interviews with sex workers (Bernstein, 2007b). Accompanying this shift in the job market, the invisibility and accessibility of online sex work as opposed to street prostitution made it more available to the middle class than previously. Women with technological skills could more easily work without relying on management or street work, thus staying safer from legal persecution and having control over their clients and roles (Bernstein, 2007b). These two technologically- birthed societal factors (gender gap and internet accessibility) changed the marketplace and the sex industry.
2017 in the United States marked a sudden change in the role the internet played in facilitating sex work. The Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act of 2017 17
removed the legal protections websites previously claimed under free speech rights if these sites
engaged in the “promotion or facilitation of prostitution and reckless disregard of sex
trafficking” (§2421A). As a consequence of this Act, Backpage was shut down in 2018. Also in
2018, in response to this new act, Craigslist took down its space for personal advertisements, saying that it did not want to “jeopardize all our other services” because of legal action against the personal advertisements being used for sex work or sex trafficking (Craigslist About:
FOSTA, n.d.). The recent proliferation of smaller sex worker sites and the growth of sugar
dating sites could possibly be attributed to this shutdown of the larger prostitution-explicit sites.
After blatantly sexual websites were no longer tolerated, less explicit sites could take over the
market. The closure of sex work facilitating websites impacted the sex industry landscape,
making the culture amenable to sugar dating.
Western Culture and the Middle Class
Technologies impact culture and everyday life. Bernstein (2007b) identified a new
middle class which is less impacted by “socio-economic deprivation” (p. 485). Rather than turn
to the sex industry out of desperation, as one of the popular victimization tropes characterizes the
decision to begin sex work, these women are drawn by the possibilities sex work could open.
They are also more likely to incorporate emotional conversations and more intimate acts like
caressing and kissing (Bernstein, 2007b). They usually spend more time with clients and work
more often in their own home than street workers. This difference creates the opportunity for
deeper and more authentic connections with regular clients (Bernstein, 2007b).
The existence of “middle class” sex work mirrors the position sugar dating is often
allotted in the media and scholarly research. In much literature, sugar dating is treated as middle
class sex work and sugar babies compared to “high class” escorts and prostitutes where a 18
distinction is drawn between them and outdoor sex workers (Miller, 2011). Sex being sold
alongside technology or other mainstream products has also made it more acceptable or ordinary
instead of shameful to the middle class (Daly, 2017).
Additionally, younger generations (like the students I focus on in this discussion) differ
from older generations in their sexual and personal decisions. This is especially true of young
middle-class people living in urban centers. Marriage is being delayed, children are postponed or
not chosen, gay relationships are increasingly accepted and chosen, and monogamy is less
prevalent (Bernstein, 2007b).
Middle Class Sex Workers and Authenticity. Authenticity is common in middle class service sector careers. Middle class work often requires an understanding of emotional and sensitivity rules which working class jobs do not require beyond externals, and this transfers into the sex industry (Bernstein, 2007b). One difference between middle class sex workers (and sugar
babies) and street-level sex workers is the creation of a sense of “bonded authenticity” with their
clients (Bernstein, 2007b, p. 484). Bonded authenticity refers to an authentic-feeling connection
between people which in the case of sex workers, is often manufactured. Whereas street sex
workers often are paid for the act and spend very little time with their clients, middle class sex
workers are paid for their time and incorporate more personal conversations and attention into
their services and work than just sex (Bernstein, 2007b).
Additionally, a sense of meaning is often drawn from one’s work, especially for the
middle class, so it is important for middle class sex workers to feel that the services they provide
also imbue them with personal meaning. Despite a common view that sex workers have a split or
duel sense of self where the work persona is kept compartmentalized from the true self, middle
class sex workers often strive for a single, authentic self which transcends both work life and 19
personal life (Bernstein, 2007b). This divide can be called the “front stage” versus “back stage”
being, as described by Goffman’s (1959) framework of self-presentation. Front stage acting is
when the sugar baby is actively creating the persona and emotions desired by the sugar daddy,
and back stage is the relaxed, everyday reality of the sugar baby (Daly, 2017). This performance
can be further organized into “surface acting and “deep acting” (Hochschild, 1985). Surface acting is when the sugar baby simply manufactures the appearance of enjoyment or the desired emotion, and deep acting is when they convince themselves of their role and internalize it.
Late Capitalism and Neoliberalism
Different facets of culture are intertwined and impact one another; social trends in a culture often directly reflect the changes in the economic health of the area. Based on case studies from Leeds and Las Vegas, Brents and Sanders (2010) analyzed how economic inclusion and social ambivalence have contributed to the mainstreaming of the sex industry. The new economic patterns that accompanied late stage capitalism in the West have created the opening for the sex industry to become part of mainstream economics and large public markets (Brents &
Sanders, 2010), as evidenced by sex workers advertising on Craigslist next to advertisements for cars and furniture.
An economic culture of neoliberalism in the western world has removed structural barriers and legal regulations in the market, allowing sex work more freedom and less-regulated access to economic markets. Neoliberalism is an environment of privatization and unregulated industry (“Neoliberalism,” n.d.). Though the word “neoliberalism” did not even begin to grow in usage until the 1980s (Books Ngram Viewer: Neoliberalism, n.d.), neoliberalist and individualist trends were already impacting voting in the United States as early as the 1970s (Kennedy, 2016).
Individualism online is demonstrated in many fields not related to the sex industry, such as 20
YouTube, where artists, amateurs and piraters share videos and even turn profit. Though in no
way responsible for sex work, as clearly evidenced by sex work in non-liberal and non- capitalistic societies and before the creation of capitalism (Kennedy, 2016), neoliberalism non- the-less unavoidably influences the possibilities and opportunities for the sex industry, allowing more people to be involved both as consumers and providers than in more restrictive societies.
The sex industry can also be increasingly integrated into the mainstream market because business patterns can be codified and regularized and marketing can be legally conducted like any other business (Brents & Sanders, 2010). The idea that anything can be commodified and worth a price indeed impacts society both economically and socially. Though this economic and social state of lax regulatory oversight has enabled large numbers of people to work independently, it also means that men and women doing sex work have few legal rights as workers in terms of harassment, employment rights, and health and safety (Brents & Sanders,
2010).
Risks and Dangers Associated with Sex Work
The fact that sugar dating is not categorized as sex work does not mitigate the risks for students participating in it. Student sex workers in Canada identified increased risks from their work being illegal, including the lack of social and legal rights allowed to other forms of work
(Hammond, 2019). All of Kennedy’s (2016) interview participants said that due to their participation in the sex industry, they had been exposed to harassment, been excluded from education or employment opportunities, had experienced their safety being threatened, or had not been able to access the full spectrum of social services to which they should have been entitled.
Overall, there are many negative aspects associated with sex work and sugar dating, whether 21
legal or illegal, including health, physical safety, legal protection or criminalization, and mental
health.
Disease and Sickness
Acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) is one of the leading causes of death globally among young adults and transactional sex has been documented to greatly increase the risk of sexually transmitted dieses (STD)s and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (Ajayi &
Somefun, 2019; Roberts et al., 2010). An important form of protection against sexually- transmitted illnesses is condom use during sex, but sugar babies may not always feel comfortable demanding protection. In a study done in urban Kenya, though condom use was negotiated between partners, sugar daddies were less likely to use condoms if the age gap was greater or the financial dependence stronger (Luke, 2005). This suggests that the more relative power the
purchaser had, be it wealth, influence or age, the less likely the safety of the provider would be
valued. Research on unprotected sexual practices in relation to sugar dating in the United States
is not easily available, however practices in urban areas may be comparable because of common
city culture. Thus, these finding may reflect trends in urban areas in the United States and should be further explored.
Bodily Harm and Violence
Potential threats to physical safety of sex workers include the possibility of being stalked, working in a hostile environment, and an increased risk of experiencing domestic violence or homicide (Kennedy, 2016). One student stopped studying on campus because a stalker who found her through her sex work (Kennedy, 2016). Sex workers make up a disproportionate percentage of serial killer murders (Kennedy, 2016). 22
There is an important distinction in relation to sugar babies, however. Online sex workers
and sex workers who advertise and find clients online have been repeatedly shown to experience
lower levels of violence and harassment and engage in fewer high-risk behaviors as compared to
sex workers who work on the streets (Cunningham & Kendall, 2011). Similarly, indoor sex workers (such as those who work in brothels or massage parlors) experience less violence than outdoor. Weitzer (2010) supports this stratification within sex work and argues that the dangers are very different based on sex work type. The implication on sugar dating is that because it is an online-facilitated (and thus more comparable to indoor sex work than outdoor), the physical dangers to the sugar babies could be fewer than overall statistics for sex workers suggest.
Legal Recourse
When violence and abuse do occur, sex workers are often left without help from social structures and the legal system. Because prostitution is illegal in most states in the United States, going to the police can be seen as impossible or a risk because gaining a criminal record bars people from many forms of future legal employment (Brents & Sanders, 2010). The police can also be a friendly or vengeful/aggressive entity; moreover the “structural imperative to intervene” in the lives of sex workers (specifically street sex workers) may operate within the police unit, despite individual officers (Bernstein, 2007a, p. 65).
In an overtly anti-sex work article reporting on the state of sex work in the Netherlands,
Farley argues that police and health care providers would not help sex workers even when the work is decriminalized because they “share the same contempt toward those in prostitution that others do” (2004, p. 1193). Despite the inflammatory wording and assumption that nothing would change with legalization or decriminalization, the sentiment is indeed harbored by many people in positions to help the public (Sagar et al., 2015). Even when these sentiments are not 23 present, sex workers may avoid seeking help because of fear of being illtreated out of negative opinions toward them. The reality that sex workers did not legally prosecute violent clients before decriminalization does not reflect on a preference of welcoming abuse but rather suggests that they do not feel safe, protected or represented in the legal system. Indeed, different types of sex workers and sex workers in legal brothels as compared with those working illegally have very different relationships with law enforcement, as documented by Weitzer (2009) in his overview of the sociology of sex work.
Psychological Health
There are conflicting studies on the mental health of sex workers. Some studies show that beginning to work as a sex worker may correlate with an increase in self-esteem (Weitzer, 2009).
Escorts interviewed in a study by Koken, Bimbi and Parsons positively reframed themselves as liberated and adventurous, explained their work as helping people like a councilor, and even became engaged in social activism against stigma (2010). A high income, control over working conditions and schedule, positive reinforcement from customers, and the feeling of helping people are all factors which can contribute to a high level of job satisfaction in sex workers
(Weitzer, 2009). “As a prostitute, you learn to say no” one of Bernstein study participants commented, and this provided a sense of agency and power (Bernstein, 2007a, p. 76).
There is also evidence that psychological health can suffer from participation in the sex industry. Being a sex worker is correlated with low mental health, regular consumption of alcohol, and acting antisocially (Betzer et al., 2015). Haeger and Deil-Amen’s (2010) interviews with female student sex workers reveal that emotional exhaustion and the perceived degrading nature of the work are an enormous burden on many of the women. 24
Whore Stigma. Stigma can be visible or hidden and managed in many different ways
(Goffman, 1959). Stigma is a main hardship faced by people who choose sex work (Haeger &
Deil-Amen, 2010; Jones, 2019; Kennedy, 2016; Sinacore et al., 2014). That stigma is attached to sex work is made clear simply in the plethora of derogatory slang terms used to describe sex workers, including “ho,” “whore,” and “hooker” (Kennedy, 2016) and is further highlighted by the fact that calling a non-working woman any of these terms, or even “slut,” is seen as highly derogatory. Unfortunately, stigma is not only often reproduced in religious and moralistic opinions but also in research in the social sciences (Weitzer, 2010).
Haeger and Deil-Amen’s (2010) participants also revealed a high level of stress and cognitive dissonance when talking about their work and identities. There is a common, overwhelming fear among sex workers around their occupational identity being revealed to friends and family and stress from secrecy if they are unable or too afraid to share their lives
(Kennedy, 2016). Social rejection, or simply the fear of being excluded from one’s personal circle, can be damaging to psychological well-being. This fear could result in an increased reliance on other sex workers for emotional support instead of old social circles, which could isolate the person from their original community and/or act as a trapping factor to quitting if his or her support and community has transitioned to being primarily inside the sex industry. Not being able to talk about identity can also be particularly difficult if sex workers view their work through the middle class lens and consider it a core part of their identity (Bernstein, 2007b).
Many workers keep their working identity secret from everyone expect clients and other sex workers (Kennedy, 2016). The stress of identity management and secrecy could lead to dropping out of school if the sex worker is a student, further hurting their chances of finding work outside of the sex industry (Haeger & Deil-Amen, 2010). If they maintain enrollment, student sex 25
workers are still at risk of losing motivation to succeed academically and risk declining grades
(Sinacore et al., 2014).
This secrecy, which can impact relationships and schooling, can lead to an extreme
feeling of aloneness. Lantz (2005) found isolation and vulnerability to be common among student sex workers because of the lengths they go to hide their work identities in academic and non-work settings. Because of a deep fear of stigma, sex workers cannot treat their job like non-
sex workers can, chatting about it with friends or even just answering the introductory small talk
question of “so what do you do” without having to make a decision about the relative risk to their
mental health if they answer honestly (Sinacore et al., 2014; Weitzer, 2010).
Prevalence of Sex Work and Sugar Dating Among Students
Despite all the risks, people, including a large portion of students, willingly work as sex
workers. The sex industry impacts the lives of many students across the world, either through
direct participation or indirectly through contact with involved students. 5% of university
students in the UK report having worked in the sex industry and 20% report having considered it
(Sagar et al., 2015). The numbers in Berlin, Germany were even higher with 7% of students
involved in sex work at the time of the study or previously (Betzer et al., 2015). A Nigerian
study found that 24% of students surveyed reported having sex for compensation (Ajayi &
Somefun, 2019). The percentage was 25% of sampled university students in Uganda (Choudhry et al., 2014).
Why, despite the risks, do students participate in sex work and sugar dating? Bernstein
(2007) asked this question in terms of middle-class sex workers while conducting interviews in
Europe and the United States. If sex work is posited as a decision made under extreme duress
and an act of hopelessness, then how does the researcher understand women and men who 26 choose sex work despite racial, class and educational privilege (Bernstein, 2007)? Even students without racial, class, or financial privileged, but who benefit from educational privilege may possibly be understood as a middle-class.
Bernstein found that economics still played a large role in many female workers’ decisions, using students as examples. Educated and privileged, middle-class women expect creative, engaging jobs and yet the gender disparity of the work field bars many women from applicable positions. Women in postindustrial economies are still unequally paid in comparison to their male counterparts and more likely to work in parttime or service jobs (Bernstein, 2007).
Bernstein (2007) gives the examples of Elise and Zoey, who while studying or upon graduating from university with advanced degrees, were met with dismal employment opportunities and turned to sex work because of its higher pay. This finding is strengthened by studies with adolescent students in Japan. There, adolescent student sugar babies come primarily from upper and middle class homes and cite the free choice of clients and the pressure of social conformity as key motivating factors rather than poverty (Lee & Shek, 2013). Theirs is not a choice out of desperation but of lifestyle and self-expression.
Research on sugar dating in Hong Kong further sheds light on this phenomenon in terms of societal and childhood influences on the choice to sugar date. Poor family functioning was a risk factor revealed in a data analysis study by Lee and Shek (2013) of 3,638 secondary school students in Hong Kong. Though the focus of the study is adolescent and not young adult students
(high school aged as opposed to college aged), many trends may apply more broadly than just this sample. Girls, for example, reported seeking affection lacking in their homes, and a few even reported choosing sugar dating as a way to enact revenge against patriarchy (Lee & Shek, 2013).
A study of 300 adult street sex workers in Arizona revealed a sizeable impact of family 27 conditions (such as physical or sexual abuse or parental alcohol or drug abuse) as well as racial and educational factors on the age at which women entered sex work, with additional factors decreasing the age a woman or girl first enters (Kramer & Berg, 2003).
Clearly there are circumstances, influences, and motivations for students to do sex work, and many of these factors may also apply to sugar dating; some students may be attracted to a specific lifestyle whereas others may feel they have no other options. Though a causal link cannot be quantitatively determined, sugar dating is indeed advertised as a temporary way for students to pay tuition and succeed at college, especially to those who have no other means of funding. According to a New York Times article, Seeking Arrangement’s targeted advertisements queue on Google searches like “tuition help” or “college support” (Padawer, 2009). Roberts et al.
(2013) estimates that up to 355 million pounds is channeled into higher education in the United
Kingdom alone through the sex industry.
Whether or not students make their choices freely or out of desperation, universities are benefiting from money earned in what could be classified as the sex industry. If the cost of attending university like BGSU which claims to be “a public university for the public good”
(Dupont, 2019) pressures students into an exploitative means of survival, there needs to be a conversation around this and ongoing research into its extent (Roberts, Bergström, & LaRooy,
2010). Universities have a responsibility to consider the welfare of their students, especially when it is taken into account that tuition fees keep the university afloat (Ajayi & Somefun, 2019;
Sagar et al., 2015, 2016).
Despite motivation, these students also have individual needs and perspectives in the university setting. Understanding the student sugar baby experience is a vital step to integrating these students into the university community and equipping staff to serve their unique needs 28
(Sager et al., 2016). Students working in the sex industry cite the availability of university services as critical to their well-being, even if they do not actively use these services (Hammond,
2019; Jones, 2019). One of the most detrimental things to mental health (as vocalized by student sex workers in the United States) is the oppressive silence on campus and lack of acknowledgement that sex work coexist with campus (Jones, 2019). Sugar babies may experience these same pressures because they manage a similar stigmatized identity. Without understanding the self-identifications, internal conflicts, and voices of these students, universities will not be able to best serve and support this part of the student body. In spite of this clear need, there is still a dearth of research into sugar relationships (Scull, 2020).
Literature on Exiting Sex Work
Student sugar babies and sex workers often seem to posit their sex work as a short-term way to put themselves through school and often plan on quitting upon graduation (Lantz, 2005).
It is unknown, however, whether or not students do actually quit upon graduation as planned or if they rather change their minds and choose to stay or feel trapped within it (Daly, 2017; Drucker,
2016; Hammond, 2019; Roberts et al., 2010, 2013; Sanders & Hardy, 2015). Preliminary research reveals trapping factors which bar exit (Jones, 2019; Sanders & Hardy, 2015). Although most of Jones’ (2019) participants implied that they had planned to only work as sex workers until they completed their degree, only one of the 17 still were committed to this plan after actually beginning working in the sex industry.
Motivations to Continue
Sanders and Hardy (2015) opaquely indicate the possibility of trapping cycles (of financial need other factors) which keep women in the sex industry even after receiving their 29
education. For example, if women are using this work to meet financial needs, then high
graduate unemployment may force them to continue longer than they had expected or planned.
There is also the element of normalization. Through an increased respectability of
middle-class commodification of sex and a mainstreaming of the sexual industry, more people
are coming to consider the purchase and sale of sexual commodities and services as acceptable
(Sanders & Hardy, 2015) and the sex industry has become commonplace in the middle class
(Brents & Sanders, 2010). Though beginning sex work may be a process, maintaining the new
norm and continuing to work may be the path of least resistance and easier than active change.
Studies in Asia have shown that an addicting element of such arrangements for the sugar
baby might be social psychological motivations such as status symbols and clothing marking a
high spending power as well as the positive feelings of being desired by wealthy men (Lee et al.,
2016). Many of the motivations for compensated dating in Asian countries seem to be boredom,
rebellion or curiosity rather than survival (Lee et al., 2016). It allowed the student participants to
support themselves and the materialistic lifestyle they perceived as necessary to remain socially
relevant and be able to participate in any social situation without hesitation. This was more
common among students who did not have stable families, paternal care, maternal protection,
and other supports (Lee et al., 2016).
There are many other reasons, however, why students may not quit as planned. One
reason is that an attachment to their benefiter may form and a deeper relationship may develop
(Scull, 2020). Sugar dating can manifest as a “unique relational package” with specific frameworks and meanings devised by the participants (Scull, 2020, p. 138). Although Scull distinguished the many different forms of an arrangement, the common thread to all sugar dating relationships is that the partners developed some level of authentic emotions for one another and 30
genuinely enjoyed time spent together. This ranged from a mostly manufactured emotional
connection in what she termed “sugar prostitution” to a “pragmatic love” arrangement where the
sugar baby actually views her benefactor as a “potential mate” for life (Scull, 2020, p.150). This
could make quitting difficult because authentic feelings would conflate work with personal
relationships and thus make quitting a job seem more like a messy breakup. This is especially
true if one or both partners considered it more a relationship than an arrangement.
Resume and Future Job Prospects
For highly motivated students, under-the-table income provided by sugar dating could
possibly offset the cost of accepting an unpaid internship or low paid job offering good
experience or networking opportunities, which not otherwise be financially feasible for many other students. It could also allow them to build their resumes on-campus and through volunteer positions while not sacrificing their financial stability. Daly (2017) argues that student sugar babies may achieve social mobility through early financial independence. It may make getting hired for a first “on-paper” job difficult if the student had never been through that process before and only knew the internship and volunteer world. If people have been financially stable due to under-the-table work, a full curriculum vitae in order to get a new job may not be a reality for them. Sex workers often cannot list their work on their resume because of its illegal nature (when applicable) or social stigma, and thus may have large gaps of time on their resume with no work experience to list, making finding a new job difficult (Kennedy, 2016). This is an important point where the student experience may diverge from the general sugar dating population. Students may not be expected to have a resume or can explain gaps in working history with time for school. Students may be more immune to this problem because they can use their studies as the reason for no record of work. Finally, the legal situation may also possibly pose problems for 31 future work. Being arrested for prostitution. A criminal record makes applying to legal work very difficult. Even if not prosecuted, a publicly accessible name or photo online could still be a barrier on background checks or employer research during or after the hiring process (Kennedy,
2016).
Processes of Exit or Continuation
Literature and research on students doing sex work is scarce. Thus, an understanding of the limitations, barriers and processes that sex workers experience when exiting the industry illuminates possible overlaps with the student experience. Extensive barriers to exit, including relationships, societal factors and individual factors, may be very difficult to overcome, resulting in sex workers usually not leaving the sex industry on their first attempt (Baker et al., 2010). In fact, the possibility of re-entry into sex work is so likely that the aforementioned authors discredit many other markers of “final exit” posited by earlier models including the creation of a
“before” narrative or not returning to sex work for set a length of time (noted as at least six months) and note that even legal employment and a safe home are not strong enough markers
(Baker et al., 2010, p. 593). Instead of corroborating these potential markers of permanent exit, they mention a 1999 model developed by Månsson and Hedin which did not speak of a stage of permanent exit but rather ended with the difficulties experienced after exiting.
In the integrated exit model developed by Baker et al. (2010), reentry into the profession is one possibly after the “initial exit” stage. This reentry stage may offer increased knowledge and determination about the process and requirements of exiting or may result in an increased feeling of hopelessness and inability to leave. Those who failed and feel unable to succeed face serious barriers because they often go unnoticed by formal support providers because their lack of outward steps toward leaving (Baker et al., 2010). Ultimately, however, the likelihood that 32
women working in street level sex work will not permanently stop working in the sex industry is
always present. As Baker et al. (2010) states, “There are, in other words, no guarantees… we believe that reentry is always a possibility” (p. 594). Though Baker et al. (2010) focuses
exclusively on street level prostitution as opposed to encompassing the larger diversity of
different types of sex workers, and thus their findings may not reflect the sugar dating
experience, these findings should give pause to all researchers of sex work as a potential
outcome.
Alongside barriers to exit, there are also factors which make exit more likely or easier. In
a qualitative study of 17 adult sex workers in the process of leaving the US indoor and outdoor
sex industry, Hickle (2017) found common themes in the elements necessary to build resilience:
social and/or religious relationships, availability of community and personal resources, and a
sense of personal empowerment new understanding of perceived consequences of their work (p.
309). Specifically, in exiting sex work, many women mentioned the important role of another ex-
sex worker as someone they could talk with, feel connected to, and not be stigmatized or isolated
by when talking. Children and spiritual beliefs also helped participants in this study leave.
Resources identified were often not financial but a social network of people who were there to
help and walk alongside the women. Resources also represented simply a safe place to live and
be supported.
In her work on indoor and outdoor adult sex workers, Sanders (2007) analyzed the four
types of exit patterns: reactionary, gradual planning, natural progression, and yo-yoing. The first
is a reaction to an event such as a friend of family member discovering the work, getting sick or
pregnant, or experiencing or hearing about a violent act. Gradual planning exit patterns usually
reflected either a step forward in career planning or entering a drug treatment program or safe 33 home. Exits which followed a natural progression pattern were usually set into motion by natural factors such as aging, disillusionment, or desire for a different lifestyle. Lastly, the pattern of yo- yoing is usually accompanied by psychological stress, failing a rehab program, and/or criminal involvement.
Maher et. al (2012) identified an additional reason why women (specifically students, graduated students, and parents of children) exiting sex work may yo-yo: the sex work environment offers flexibility of shifts, the opportunity to quit and then return, and a high wage for the hours worked. Thus, even though some student sex workers graduated, they returned to or remined doing sex work because the financial and flexibility aspects of working in the sex industry made work in other industries less appealing (Maher et al., 2012, p. 663). In this same study, students reported that they tended to work when they had a specific bill and then stop for a while once they achieved their goal until the next financial obligation sent them back to the sex industry. International students especially were vulnerable to the pressures of finances based on visa work limitations and often a higher currency in the host country than their home country.
Assumedly, upon completing their degrees or returning to their home countries, these students would stop working, however there is no available research on whether or not this is actually what happens.
Sex Work in Germany vs. the United States
Legal Atmosphere in Germany and the United States
Though 7% of surveyed students both in Berlin (Betzer et al., 2015) and the American
Midwest (Stoll, 2017) report engagement in transactional sex, the differences between the countries goes deeper. This is especially true of the legal system. Before 2002 there were no specific federal laws governing sex work in Germany. It was neither illegal nor criminalized, yet 34
deemed “immoral and antisocial” by the courts and services and resources for sex workers were
restricted under the premise of promoting immorality (Seals, 2015, p. 785). The Prostitution Act
in Germany attempted to improve the working environment and legal standing of sex workers,
reduce crime associated with sex work, and make a transition out of sex work more possible. It
unfortunately, had very little impact though (Pates, 2012).
In the United States, prostitution is banned except in a few counties in Nevada by
individual state laws rather than a national law (with the exception of when it falls under
interstate commerce regulations). Where it is legal, there are still zoning restrictions, citizen
action groups trying to bring change, and police harassment (Bernstein, 2007a).
In Germany, there are health centers for sex workers (Seals, 2015), but health check-ups were not mandated by law until 2016 (Sauer, 2019). Only registered sex workers and legal establishments are regulated and protected by laws. Many sex workers chose not to pay taxes, however and not legally protected (Seals, 2015). Some of these people perhaps only worked temporarily and did not make sex work their career. Others, however, could not successful achieve contracts with the brothels they worked for because there is no financial incentive for the brothel owners to pay taxes on the wages (Seals, 2015). Even places which offered contracts were not always attractive to sex workers who refused to report their work to the government in order to protect their anonymity. Many sex workers reject government cooperation because the legal rights and protections come with obligations and loss of anonymity (Kavemann, 2007).
This brings up the deeper problem of stigma.
In recent years, as reported by Vanwesenbeeck (2017), Germany has been experiencing an uptick in the attempt to control and punish workers in the sex industry, however there have 35
also been successful programs to protect sex workers from violence, such as the zone system in
Cologne (Sanders & Campbell, 2007).
Controlling the sex industry in the United States, as a result of its localized legal status, is
also done through local measures. Even in counties where sex work is legal, policies such as
“Project Hollywood” resulted in organized efforts by the police to remove street workers from
cities (Bernstein, 2007a).
Cultural Environment around Sex Work in Germany vs. the United States
Despite legalization, sex workers still face stigma and discrimination in Germany (Sauer,
2019; Seals, 2015) and in the United States (Bernstein, 2007a; Weitzer, 2010). The continued
punitive efforts of individual police forces and government agents in Germany, even after the
reform in 2002, do little to fight stigma (Pates, 2012). Sauer emphasizes that there is both a
historic “established regime” of “disgust” present in Germany in regards to sex workers, who
are considered “deviant” and “abnormal,” and a modern lens allowing compassion by viewing
them as agentless victims (2019, p. 329). Stigma is also perpetuated in reform attempts in the
United States. For example, a program called the John School (Shively et al., 2008) has been
implemented to protect sex workers through reeducating clients, but its efficacy and theoretical
underpinnings (encouraging the stereotype that sex workers are helpless victims without agency)
have been criticized.
Laws cannot automatically change deeply held societal opinions. One of the possible
reasons for the cultural persistence of stigma in Germany and the United States is the lack of
consensus about the sex industry among feminists (Bernstein, 2007a). In Germany (and Austria),
there has been a three part movement among anti-sex work feminists which harnesses the
emotions of shame and morality to campaign against what they see as women caught in 36
continued patriarchy (Sauer, 2019). This branch of feminism creates an emotional in-group and out-group on the basis of an emotion culture where those (assumedly female) sex workers who feel guilt over their actions and cease their work can be welcomed into the fold, but male purchasers and women who do not repent are outcast, labeled shameful and anti-feminist (Sauer,
2019).
In Germany, sex workers wanting to leave the industry may go to the Federal
Employment Agency. However, federal funding was cut for existing advice centers and sex workers are usually legally categorized as long-term unemployed and lacking any job qualifications or skills. In a highly vocationally trained society, jobs for people in this category are scarce and those wishing for a career change out of sex work are likely to fall below the poverty line and experience a drop in their social standing (Kavemann, 2007). In the United
States, no clear government program aimed at sex workers who want to leave the industry seems to exist, however private organizations aimed at sex trafficking sometimes accept “victims of prostitution” (Peoria Home, n.d.).
Student sex work in Germany and the United States
An online study of 75 German and Austrian female students through the Academy of
Sexual Medicine (Akademie für Sexualmedizin) found that female student sex workers were very diverse (Kinzel et al., 2010). Though finances are the most commonly acknowledged motivation, the reason given for funds is both university costs (78.4% of participants agreed) as well as luxury and lifestyle costs (71.6% of participants agreed) (Kinzel et al., 2010). Around three times the number of participants identified money as their motivator as opposed to the next highest motivator (desire for sex). The study did not find that a significant proportion had adverse sexual experiences as children, unhealthy homelives, or difficult families, but rather 37
listed sexual pleasure, power, and pleasure of being desired as factors motivating their decision
to work in the sex industry. More than a third of the participants said that they were made aware
of the possibility of supporting themselves through sex work through conversations with other
students, suggesting that sex work is seen as a work option among university students and often
introduced for the first time through friends rather than advertisements (Kinzel et al., 2010).
Like in Germany, student sex workers in the United States attributed their decisions to
finances (university costs) but also focused on the benefits of low time commitment (Haeger &
Deil-Amen, 2010). Paying for university and life as a student may be more difficult in the United
States. In comparison to Germany, where university tuition is free (though administrative fees, books, and living costs still can become expensive for students) (Kaschel, 2017), whereas the cost of attending a four year university in the United States was around 27,000 per year for the
2017-2018 school year (Digest of Education Statistics, 2018, 2019).
Sex work is a common topic of German scholarly research. Sugar dating, however, does not appear to be researched at all in the German context. Despite occasional blog posts and news articles, there is a lack of scholarly literature, in comparison to the limited but growing attention in the United States. Likewise, the leading German websites for sugar dating are few, have a narrower audience than their American counterparts, and reach a smaller percentage of the population.
Theoretical Framework: Bronfenbrenner
Existing international research on sugar dating has taken place under diverse conceptual frameworks within many disciplines, including psychology (Reed, 2015), law and legal studies
(Daly, 2017; Miller, 2011; Motyl, 2013), social work (DeSoto, 2018), communication (Cordero,
2015), and sociology (Scull, 2020). Though student status is often taken for granted in studies of 38 this nature, the current research focuses explicitly on people who have sugar dated while students and thus educational psychology, specifically Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model of human development, informs the design of the present research.
Students who turn to sex work do not make the decision in a vacuum but are influenced by everything in their lives, place, and time. All of people’s life experiences help shape who they become and how they act, think, understand the word, and make decisions. Their personal agency is informed by their environmental factors when the student makes a decision, such as quitting or continuing sugar dating.
Bioecological Model
Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory shows how people are influenced by their environment, from the immediate family influences to broader influences of national structures and era. The “multiperson systems of interaction not limited to a single setting” deeply influence a person’s development (Bronfenbrenner, 1977, p. 514).
Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model is conceptualized as a diagram of concentric circles showing the spheres of influence within which a child develops. The innermost circle is the person him/herself. The smallest ring around that person is called the micro system, which represents the relationship between the person and the most intimate setting, the immediate environment, church, family and close friends (Bronfenbrenner, 1977). The second ring is the mesosystem, the interaction between major settings (Bronfenbrenner, 1977). This refers to social and environment overlaps such as the interaction between parents and school, church and home, or friends and parents. Next, the exosystem stands in for the influences of the local and community environment, including available social services, formal institutional relationships, local politics and laws, neighbors and community, and even local industry and businesses. The 39
macrosystem refers to ideas on a national or cultural level, the “overall institutional patterns of
the culture or subculture” (1977, p. 515). It encompasses also the general cultural prototypes
(values, customs, norms, class structure) the culture offers members of a community—what
identities are possible to inhabit and what is considered good and normal (Bronfenbrenner,
1977).
Bronfenbrenner and Adults
One important misunderstanding which can arise when using Bronfenbrenner’s theories
is the belief that they only apply to children and youth. In fact, he himself identifies “the often
tacit and unwarranted assumption that the main directions of future development in general are
set in childhood” is an unfortunate erroneous assumption often associated with his work
(Bronfenbrenner & Evans, 2000, p. 122). Major changes can indeed take place after the person
has entered and long been in adulthood, and change “extends over the life course” not just in
childhood (Bronfenbrenner, 2005). He identifies the present age as “a period of growing chaos”
in which human intervention to change and “re-create” the environment is necessary
(Bronfenbrenner & Evans, 2000, p. 123).
Human beings are always developing and looking only at childhood and the past limits
the researcher. The focus of research using Bronfenbrenner’s theories is not to trace history but
rather to identify forces which are operating today (which were formed in the past) and may
impact the future (Bronfenbrenner & Evans, 2000).
Human Agency
Just as environments influence people, people also structure and change their environments. Bronfenbrenner argues that youth can change not only their life trajectories but also the environments in which they live in order to alter the influences they experience. Humans 40 gain the ability, from a very young age, of “refashioning the environment so that it is more compatible with his abilities, needs, and desires” (Bronfenbrenner, 1977, p. 10). Though much research with Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model emphasizes the impact the environment plays on the person, the impact goes in both directions, with the person also impacting the environment. One example of research in this vein is Voight’s (2012) study on the impact youth have on their environments through their civic engagement. He shows how not only people influence their environment on a large-scale, enacting sweeping change such as with the civil rights movement in the United States, and also small-scale, like petitioning for a school policy change. Human agency is becomes more strongly emphasized in the bioecological model when paired with the PPCT model design.
While Bronfenbrenner acknowledges the existence of agency and incorporates it into his later theories, Badura (2006) explores it much more deeply, describing four main parts: intentionality, forethought, self-reactiveness, and self-reflectiveness. The core of human agency is the belief in self-efficacy, the belief that people can successfully enact the changes they are attempting and achieve their goals (Bandura, 2006). There are three different levels of agency-- individual, proxy, and collective (Bandura, 2006)—and even within the single level of the individual, it can manifest in many facets of life including morality (moral agency). Combining
Badura’s (2006) concept of human agency with Bronfenbrenner’s (1977) bioecology model allows the research to both consider the external influences and life elements which the women in the study experience, while emphasizing their ability to make choices (rather than simply being pushed by external factors) and change their environments.
41
PPCT Model and Proximal Processes
Bronfenbrenner’s theories developed and changed over the course of his research and ignoring this in research based on his theories can lead to incoherence and misuse. Rosa and
Trudge (2013) identified three phases in his theoretical development: 1973-1979 brought a model of the ecology of development, 1980-1993 saw modifications to this ecological model, and 1993-2006 brought the development of the bioecological theory with the PPCT model at its core. Though the bioecological theory always included the influence of the individual on the environment as a core tenant, the later years brought more emphasis through a focus on how context, historical time and the specific characteristics of a person all come together to influence the environmental process (Rosa & Tudge, 2013).
PPCT is an acronym for proximal processes, personal characteristics, context and time.
Proximal processes become the crux of the theory (Rosa & Tudge, 2013). Proximal processes are the way that the combination of the individual (and his or her genetics) and the environment form a developed human. Generally, proximal processes work to develop a human in healthy ways and are strengthened by the presence of healthy relationships (Rosa & Tudge, 2013).
Personal characteristics are organized into groups including generative or disruptive characteristics, resource characteristics, and demand characteristics. Context is where the bioecological theory becomes part of this model and time refers to the chromosphere but also the individual’s own lifespan and personal life stages. As people develop as individuals, proximal processes result in either dysfunction or competence (Bronfenbrenner & Evans, 2000). The word choice seems harsh but broadly refers to the person’s ability adapt his or her behavior to diverse environments and situations or the person’s consistent struggle to remain in control of behavior when adapting to these differences. 42
Sugar dating is not dysfunction. Rather, it is viewed in this present thesis as an example of environmental behavior adaptation based on the needs and wants of the student entering into the arrangement and his or her ability to achieve these things. Individuals who engage in sugar dating may have areas of competence and dysfunction in their lives like all individuals, however sugar dating is a clear action, not a chaotic struggle. The motivations and actions upon graduating and after may be dependent not only on the students’ perceptions of sugar dating but also on their personal bioecology. If, for example, they lack other strong non-sugar relationships or are culturally influenced to be self-sufficient and display status symbols, they may be more likely to choose to delay quitting, not plan on quitting at all, or not permanently quit.
Additional Theoretical Underpinnings
In addition to Bronfenbrenner, Erikson’s (1959) theory of the eight stages of personality development, Marcia’s (1993) theory of identity statuses, and Piaget’s theory of moral development as explicated by Piaget and Gabain (1965) are implemented to more deeply understand the interview participants’ stories, worldviews and understanding of sugar dating.
Chapter Summary
Student sugar babies are individuals. Like all humans they are both shaped by environment like all humans and imbued with the ability and agency to change their environments and create their own lives. The existent scholarly research has generally conflated sugar arrangements with the work of sex workers, however this further stigmatizes these men and women and may not reflect their own self identities.
Sex work itself is very individualized. From reports of high homicide rates to increased self-esteem, stigma and family disfunction to middle class autonomy and entrepreneurship, and student desperation and vulnerability to high achievement and motivation, the range of 43 experiences and is broad. These apparent contradictions make continued research all the more necessary and this discussion is not one which can be ignored. This study aims to avoid the stigmatizing label of sex work and focus separately on individual students who sugar date, creating a narrative of their unique experiences without overlaying other narratives on top.
44
METHODS
Conceptual Framework
Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological frameworks helped organize and evaluate the many strata of
influences in the research participants’ lives. These theories recognize the layers of a person’s
life and the overlap between layers and as well as the influences of time, personal characteristics,
and process. Students who sugar date do not just make decisions based on one aspect of their
lives (financial state, social life, family, career, lifestyle, location, peers, friends, university, etc.)
but rather operate within a complex environment of all of these things and make complex
decisions that impact their ecosystems. The combination of agency and environment (within the
model of proximal processes, personal characteristics, context and time) leads to the different
possible decisions student sugar babies reach regarding quitting or continuing after graduation.
In order to understand these decisions, the person and his or her entire world must be taken into
account.
Interviews allowed the researcher to ask directly about the ecosystem and learn about more
aspects than observation, where just one setting is viewed. A limited number of in-depth interviews were chosen for this current research because of their ability to cover more aspects of the participants’ lives than short conversations with a larger group of participants would have allowed. As context and background information, content analyses of two leading websites allowed for information triangulation from the interviews and supplied a base knowledge before and during the interviews regarding what sugar dating promises.
Research Questions
With all the resources in their respective environments, including access to education, the women interviewed chose to begin and continue sugar dating throughout university and after 45
graduation. To understand their perspectives, it is helpful to understand the websites that facilitate this phenomenon and the women’s own reflections on their experiences, motivations and lives.
1. How do sugar dating websites appeal to students in America and Germany?
2. What are the experiences of student sugar babies? What are their reflection on the roles
of environment as well as personal attributes in their attraction to start sugar dating, and
in their decisions to either continue or desist upon graduation?
Methodology: Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA)
The first research question was satisfied partially through content analysis of websites,
and partly through comparing the website themes with the topics addressed by the interview
participants. Research question two was satisfied through analysis of interviews.
Sense is made of the interview data through IPA. The purpose of IPA is to understand
how specific individuals understand a phenomenon and make sense of it. This methodology
reveals the thoughts and meaning making of a narrow group of people and does not attempt to
generalize to the entire phenomenon (Smith et al., 2009). There are fewer participants and each
of their voices are probed in-depth to understand that particular perspectives on the common
experience. Thus, my study population was female, student, sugar babies, and this is not
generalizable to all sugar babies.
Both of the present research questions were exploratory and open ended yet focused on a
single, specific aspect of the sugar dating experience and a narrow group of participants sharing a
very specific experience. Thus, the IPA method was fitting. It was additionally fitting because a
central focus of IPA research is sex and sexuality (Smith et al., 2009). Many similar studies, 46 including Connop and Petrak’s (2004) research about experiencing sexual assault, rely on the
IPA method of interview and analysis.
The IPA procedure is broken into six specific steps. Firstly, the researcher deeply rereads a completed transcript. Secondly, she makes three types of marginalia: descriptive, linguistic and conceptual. Thirdly, she reorganizes the data within that transcript based on emerging themes.
This can be done by hand or using software. Fourthly, she identifies and organizes themes and may possibly decontextualize pieces of text to create a visual diagram of these themes. A critical part of this step is looking for implications in diction or thought formation and searching for hidden meaning of which the participants themselves may not be fully cognizant rather than simply collecting the surface level meaning of the words. This requires noticing when there are long pauses, verbal contradictions, stuttering or awkwardness, or incomplete thoughts and sentences. Fifthly, the researcher completes that process with each of the remaining transcripts.
Sixthly and finally, she searches for intertextual themes between all the transcripts. At this last step, the researcher may explore how the narratives bring clarity or depth to one another. At this step she may also search for brief topics or phrases the participants use (termed “gems”) which explain the phenomenon with striking clarity or hidden depth (Beck, 2021).
Bronfenbrenner and Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis
A possible criticism may be that Smith, Flowers and Larkin’s (2009) interpretative phenomenological analysis tries to avoid preconceived theories or ideas in the initial interview stage. In the case of my research, I will use their method but allow the theoretical focus of
Bronfenbrenner to narrow the original research questions, so as to specifically explore the experience of cultural and relational factors (microsphere and exosphere) in relation to sugar dating rather than the entire experience of sugar dating. Additionally, especially in regards to use 47
with studies on sexuality, theory is useful for framing and discussion when using interpretative
phenomenological analysis (IPA), as long as it does not overpower the initial interview phase
(Smith et al., 2009).
Research Design
Though there is existing research on sex work, much exploratory research is still needed
at this stage in the literature on sugar dating in order to frame and guide future, more narrowly
focused studies. Thus, the research design is two-fold, beginning with a content analysis for background information and then conducting interviews. Content analysis is a rigorous methodology for organizing information and creating meaningful knowledge about the meaning and impact of a text or set of texts (Krippendorff, 2013). A limited series of texts are collected and then coded for the presence or absence of specific elements or themes.
Websites act as sources of information into the sugar dating community because it is often otherwise invisible; members often value discretion (DeSoto, 2018). Through there are many blogs and popular press articles related to sugar dating, the authors are not necessarily speaking from any authority or experience. There is the likelihood that they may not be participants themselves and thus there is the risk of false information. Additionally, many published interviews are edited, scripted and/or guided which makes discerning the actual perceptions of the interviewee impossible. Thus, the websites which directly facilitating sugar relationships offer a primary source of knowledge into the community.
Sugar dating sites generally consist of a main homepage with images and information and login portal, through which one can access and use the rest of the website. Once logged in, the user is able to see photos, descriptions, and identifying information of other users through their profiles. Creating log-in credentials would allow the researcher access to private and identifying 48
information and become an ethical concern, as referenced by DeSoto (2018). To avoid ethical
concerns, the analysis focuses only on what is publicly available on the initial homepages with
some attention paid to other publicly accessible tabs.
I analyze two popular sugar dating websites—one based in the United States and one in
Germany—to survey the promises these sites offer and how sugar dating is presented and
advertised. Content analysis of these leading sugar dating websites, specifically seeking.com and
mysugardaddy.de, reveals how, though operating within very different cultural and legal sex work environments, websites advertise sugaring to potential student sugar babies. This in turn gives a glimpse into the context students operate within when making decisions about sugar dating; it reveals the rewards promised and the factors which may appeal to students. This supported the interview process in two ways. Without this background knowledge, understanding the interviews and asking meaningful questions of the interview participants would be impossible. Additionally, because so little is known from the scholarly literature about sugar dating, there is also a need to contextualize interviews with additional sources— specifically the internet sites which facilitate the phenomenon. Content analysis is necessary to provide solid, verifiable data to ground and triangulate the perspectives gathered through interviews.
The second research question is answered by conducting interviews. Large scale quantitative research is logistically difficult because student sex workers are a largely inaccessible population and unresearched (Daly, 2017), and qualitative, interview-based research allows the researcher access information without relying on large groups of participants. The use of language and listening to people talk about an experience reveals how people make sense of it and formulate it knowledge. As Seidman puts it, “social and educational issues are abstractions based on the 49
concrete experiences of people” (Seidman, 1991, p. 1). Interviews reveal the meaning people make out of a concrete experience and reveals the rational behind their decisions and actions
(Seidman, 1991). A serious problem to interviewing as methodology can arise when the researcher turns the participants into a subject rather than collaborators and appropriates their words and voice to his or her own benefit. One must be aware of this as it is the moral duty of the researcher to include the participants as partners in the research, honor them by taking them and the details of their lives seriously, accurately represent their meaning in later representations and analysis, and seek after equitability whenever possible (Seidman, 1991).
Interviews are also key to phenomenology. Phenomenology allows the researcher to
understand a group as a whole and traces the similarities in what the individuals experience. It
“focuses on the commonality of a lived experience within a particular group”(Creswell, 2013). It
is important, however, not to choose too wide a phenomenon or group because the findings
become contaminated by too many unrelated factors. Therefore, in the present research, student
sugar babies are being singled out from the larger group of all people who sugar date and being
held separate from the very diverse group of sex workers. Even within a narrow group, however,
there remains a danger in too much generalization in phenomenology; IPA, as explored by
Smith, Flowers and Larkin (2009), fights this homogenizing urge by insisting that the voices
highlighted in interviews reflect unique perspectives and not necessarily an entire group.
Participants
In IPA it is important that the researcher does not see the participants as reflective of the entire population but rather a specific perspective on the phenomenon. The sample should be as homogeneous as possible in order to see the smaller nuances and differences within the group
(Beck, 2021). In line with this, my sample is limited to post-college women who acted in the 50
sugar baby (as opposed to the sugar parent) role. Interview participants were chosen based on
two qualifications: having graduated from a degree-seeking program (or quit the program with
the intention of not returning) prior to our conversation and having sugar dated while studying. I
sought out diversity in race and sexual orientation but limited my sample to female student sugar
babies who had graduated or permanently quit college to allow a more precise and accurate
understanding of one experience of sugar dating (Table 1).
Table 1
Participant Characteristics
The women studied are diverse in their fields of study and careers (or career intentions)
(see Table 2), races, and the smaller details of their lives, yet represent a fairly narrow strata of society in the United States: young, college-educated women primarily from economically and socially privileged families in the Midwest and Eastern United States.
51
Table 2
Participant Fields of Study and Current Employment
The women mentioned going to good high schools and some mentioned highly educated
or wealthy parents. They grew up solidly middle (or upper-middle) class, and most say they felt sheltered and protected from the world as children and teens.
Data Collection
Snowball Sampling
I recruited participants through the snowball technique, beginning with men and women with whom I already personally have contact and then moving on to friends who the initial contacts referred to me. This type of sampling is not random but rather seeks participants who can add depth to the research through their perspectives and experiences.
The snowball method has the inherent weakness of not necessarily reflecting a representative sample of the larger population being studied and thus can introduce bias (Daly,
2017). Personal contacts may be primarily between similar people within a single social network and reflect one perspective or trait rather than a diverse sample. Though my two initial “seeds” 52
were different ages, were from different hometowns and universities and inhabited separate
social circles, they were both women from the Midwest, and their contacts formed an
unsurprisingly similar group demographically. In this way, however, the snowball sample
method actually works well with IPA methodology because the recommended sample is
homogeneous and reflects just one narrow perspective on the phenomenon, and that is a likely
outcome of snowball sampling.
Snowballing is a popular method in past sugar baby research also simply because
recruiting sex workers or sugar babies for research can be incredibly difficult (Daly, 2017).
Personal connections proved to be a way of establishing trust and gaining access to interviewees
because students in this population often maintain a high level of silence and secrecy about this
aspect of their lives (Hammond, 2019; Reed, 2015). Scull (2020) and Daly (2017) both used
snowballing (among other methods) to recruit sugar baby research participants. It has also been
used with research on other types of sex workers including Sanders’ (2007) research on sex
workers transitioning out of the industry.
Sample Size
Over the course one month, I interviewed nine participants. Eight were selected for use in
this study and one was disqualified because they did not meet the criteria of having already
graduated or quit school. An additional participant in Germany was interested in being
interviewed but was very afraid of a breach in anonymity and ultimately did not decide to participate until after the study’s conclusion. Beck (2021) suggests three to six participants as the number best suited for the IPA method because of the intense six step analysis process
(described in the data analysis section below), however I only met with each participant once, and thus do not have the depth of information I could through a series of interviews with each 53
participant. As Hammond (2019) describes, a small set of interviews has many drawbacks,
including not being necessarily generalizable, but is potentially the best way to understand the
lived experiences of this population, given the difficulties of research with student sex workers.
There are two main criteria I considered in relation to the necessary number of
participants: sufficiency and saturation (Seidman, 1991). Firstly, I considered if my sample
reflected the specific experience I was researching. My focus was very narrow because I use IPA and aimed for a homogeneous population as opposed to a representation of all sugar babies.
Secondly, saturation refers to repeated knowledge—whether new interviews introduce new topics or rather repeat what others have already stated. After eight interviews I found I had reached a point where the stories and experiences were similar.
Mental Health of Participants
Due to the sensitive nature of the conversation, there was a short debriefing after each interview in order to follow up on the interviewee’s feelings and ensure she was able to navigate any strong emotional responses which might have arisen due to the conversation. In her article on sex worker stigma negotiation, (Tomura, 2009) includes her own interview protocol. To debrief, she thanks the participant and asks if they would like to talk about their experience being interviewed. This allows the participant to feel equal to the researcher by giving relevant feedback on the process and the researcher’s methods and attempts to avoid the participant feeling simply “used” for research purposes. It also allows room to talk about any negative emotions which might have arisen. Following her precedent, I used this format to conclude my interviews. Many studies emphasize the need student sex workers and student sugar babies feel to keep their personal and work lives separate and their work carefully concealed (Hammond,
2019), so the conversations were actually experienced by most participants as a relief be able to 54
talk in a safe environment and most articulated that they enjoyed the process of thinking back
through their sugar dating experiences.
In addition, I provided information on mental health professionals in the participant’s
area if the participant wanted this information. Going to a mental health professional would be at
the discretion and cost of the participant but was an extra safeguard for the participant’s mental
health in the event that the conversation evoked strong unpleasant memories with which she had
not yet dealt.
Analysis Procedures
Content Analysis: American and German Sugar Dating Website Appeal
In order to find the most popular and thus most representative sugar dating websites in
the United States and Germany, the Google website analytics software Alexa was employed. My
initial URLs to begin the Alexa search were seeking.com and mysugardaddy.de. I chose these two because of their omnipresence in antidotal and researched accounts of sugar dating. Seeking
Arrangement has established itself as a strong leader in the English-speaking world, especially in the United States. It has been referenced or analyzed in-depth in research on internet dating, sex work and sugar dating (Cordero, 2015; Daly, 2017; DeSoto, 2018; Miller, 2011; Motyl, 2013;
Reed, 2015; Scull, 2020; Stoll, 2017) and appears regularly in popular press (Rademacher &
Snow, 2020). Mysugardaddy.de has fewer users and less prominence globally than seeking.com, in part because it represents a more limited market of strictly German speakers
(mysugardaddy.eu is the larger, host site and in English). When deciding where to begin with
German websites, one German-language website dedicated to overviews of sugar dating platforms (http://meetsugardaddy.de) and one English blog post about an interview with a
German sugar baby (https://sugardating101.com/sugar-baby-stories-steffi-aka-the-german-sugar- 55 baby) both referenced mysugardaddy.de as the (or one of the) top German site. Scholarly work on German sugar dating is not readily available to corroborate this with existing literature.
From these two initial domains, Alexa curated a list of similar websites. It scored each based on website traffic. From these URLs, I created a list of German domains (websites ending in .de) and a separate list of American domains (websites ending in .com). Sites which only mentioned sugar dating as a sub focus or even accidently cued on the word “sugar” and were unrelated were culled from my lists.
To ensure accuracy, I repeated this Alexa search for each website on my two lists, using the individual websites URLs as the initial search terms. Additional sites were added to the master lists and then also put back into the search function as keywords. When, after entering each new website as a keyword, no new sites appeared, I determined that I had reached saturation and stopped adding to my two lists.
To generate the most accurate and reliable information about the websites facilitating sugar dating during content analysis, the two most popular sites where chosen: seeking.com and mysugardaddy.de, the initial sites chosen to generate the search. The popularity algorithm works with global data from the past 90 days and measures both site engagement and internet traffic.
Alexa ranks seeking.com’s popularity worldwide at 4,184 (with 1 being the best). 65% of visitors are from the United States, with the next most popular country being Mexico with just
6%. For the German websites, mysugardaddy.de ranked the highest (with a score of 630,039), followed by sugar-daddy-finden.de from the list of five relevant German website (chosen from the twelve sites identified by Alexa initially).
56
Interviews: Student Sugar Baby Experiences and Reflections
After gaining an understanding in sugar dating promises and advantages according to the
websites, I interviewed graduated student sugar babies themselves via Zoom or phone using a
semi-structured interview format with no more than 10 questions, following the methodological suggestions IPA interviews, designed by Beck (2021). Participants were sent the questions in advance, along with the consent form, in order to preview the material in case they were uncomfortable. Participants could choose to end the interview and withdrawal consent at any
time, including after completion. I first recorded demographic information and then asked
questions regarding my second research question: factors influencing motivation for exiting (or
not exiting) sugar dating. Questions began with less sensitive topics and moved to more difficult
questions as trust was built.
When interviewing (and later analyzing), I became aware of the levels of active listening
required, as elaborated upon by Seidman (Seidman, 1991). On the surface, the listener must
follow the conversation, internalize the meaning and be actively accessing their own
understanding and where questions need to be asked for detail or clarification. Going deeper, interviewers must pay attention to words or phrases used for the benefit of an audience which actually elude exact meaning, such as something being interesting. Lastly, the interviewer must be aware of the structure of the interview: time constraints, participant nonverbal cues, questions yet to be covered.
Due to COVID-19 and geographical inconvenience, interviews primarily were conducted remotely. Additionally, the audio and distance format added a layer of anonymity to the procedure so that the interviewee wouldn’t be seen with me or overheard (as might an interview on-site on campus) and I would not even recognize the participants in person. 57
First the verbal consent was recorded (to be saved) and then a second recording began for
the interview body. The interviews consisted of a few short demographic questions, a longer
section on experiences and perceptions, and then a final open-ended question, to address anything I didn’t cover. Each lasted approximately thirty minutes to an hour, followed by a short debrief.
Transcription was conducted personally by me. After the primary transcription, I re- listened to the audio recordings and checked for accuracy. At this stage, the only differences between the typed and recorded interviews were redacted names (replaced by pre-determined pseudonyms) and any other identifying information (such as specific streets). These changes were left in brackets, but the originals were never typed into the document so as to avoid creating a digital record. After I was confident that my transcriptions matched the recording and all identifying information was removed, I sent the typed document to the interviewee for feedback on accuracy, meaning, concerns, and any additional thoughts or clarifications. If I received feedback, I created a new document with the updated transcript. Regardless of feedback, after transcription I permanently deleted the original interview recording from my computer.
Coding
For the first research question, data analysis for the first research question was preformed
thematically by hand for each website in on three textual categories: visual layout, images and
written text. Firstly, I described and compared the layout of both homepages, noting number and
types of links, organization, color scheme, font type, useability, and length. Then I counted and
described the images and also included a comparative mention of images found on the linked
tabs for additional context. I copied into a word document and live-coded, generating themes as I
progressed (see Table 3 for initial codes and final collected themes). 58
Table 3
Codes Generated from Seeking.com and Mysugardaddy.de
After finishing coding both homepages, I recoded a second time to ensure accuracy
between the websites and internally with my codes. Codes were then grouped into themes and
every instance was organized into a two-column table showing the presence or absence of each
theme in the two homepages. Because of the extreme written length difference between the
websites, I justified a theme being important on different scales for each website: a reference
needed to appear at least five times (or in at least two separate sections) on mysugardaddy.de and
at least twice on seeking.com. The presence or absence of a theme and the relative prevalence of
a theme were both noted. Lastly, themes were considered contextually and the tone of the
context (negative, positive, flattering, exciting, threatening, patronizing) was noted.
Data analysis for the second research question followed Smith, Flowers and Larkin’s
(2009) six steps of IPA interview transcript analysis and coding. After themes and deeper
meanings in all of the interviews were collected, intertextual themes and “jems” were organized
(see Table 4).
59
Table 4
Initial and Consolidated Themes from Interview Analysis
60
Triangulation was achieved through the combination of earlier content analysis of websites with these analyzed interviews and gems. A richer understanding of the interviews could be reached with by juxtaposing the participants’ experiences with the websites they read and used.
Trustworthiness
Verbal, informal member checks were conducted during interviewing by summarizing periodically during the interview and asking for confirmation that the paraphrase was a correct understanding of what was being communicated. An additional member check for accuracy was completed when the written transcription of the audio recorded interview was returned to the participant to verify that it was accurate. Additionally, a psychologist was consulted regarding the trustworthiness of the data and analysis methods.
Social Desirability
One difficulty with basing a study on participant-disclosed information is the possibility that responses are not completely accurate because of the pressures of social desirability— people’s wish to appear good or more socially acceptable in the eyes of others. This may influence research results if positive aspects overemphasized, information is changed, or facts are presented inaccurately or simply not disclosed because the interviewee wished to appear in a more socially desirable way to the interviewer. In IPA, it is important that the data is “rich,” which means that the interviewee feels safe to speak freely, able to work through ideas aloud rather than feel pressured to present the interviewer surface-level answers (Smith et al., 2009).
Different techniques were in place for the interviews in this research to mitigate the effect of social desirability, including minimizing the power differential between the interviewee and interviewer. One-to-one interviews allowed the interviewer to build trust and allowed the 61
participant room to be heard. It also allowed the interviewer to engage in a dialogue and
participate in the conversation, asking focused questions and eliciting deeper reflection (Smith et
al., 2009). Aiming for exploratory follow-up questions instead of probing or leading ones which would put the participant on the defense help keep the participant open and communicative
(Seidman, 1991). Interviews were also held at the convenience of the participants. Audio only calls were suggested in order to increase anonymity, however, meeting in person or video calling were also accepted if it increased the comfort of the participant.
Research Issues and Limitations
There were many challenges regarding data collection. Due to ethical concerns, participants could not be contacted directly through their online sugar dating profiles because the researcher would have had to access non-public information and create a profile to do so.
Instead, a dependance on gatekeepers was vital, but these gatekeepers, often sugar daddies, did not often want to communicate the study information to sugar babies they knew due to concerns about their own privacy, assumptions about the desires of the sugar babies, and awkward relationships with past sugar babies. COVID-19 added challenges to data collection in Germany
because a planned trip in the summer of 2020 was cancelled and trust was thus not adequately
established with any of the German contacts. Of the three gatekeepers with contact to German
sugar babies, only one resulted in a sugar baby in Germany willing to be interviewed, and she (a
master’s student) did not have time until after the thesis was completed.
Chapter Summary
Content analysis of websites alongside phenomenological interviews analyzed through
the IPA methodology work to answer both research questions of what websites promise in order
to draw students to sugar dating and the environmental and personal factors that influence 62 students in sugar dating decisions. Seeking.com and mysugardaddy.de were identified as the most popular sugaring websites in the United States and Germany, respectively, and content analysis was conducted through descriptions of main website elements and thematic coding of the written text. Interview participants were identified through snowball sampling, carefully interviewed to protect their identities, and transcripts were coded and themes collected using the six step IPA methodology. Together, the websites and interviews provided information about the individual perspectives of graduated student sugar babies.
63
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
Chapter Overview
Key themes from the two websites and eight interview transcripts are discussed to answer the questions of how sugar dating websites appeal to students, what these students experience as sugar babies, and how they reflect on the roles of environmental and personal attributes decisions to begin, continue or desist sugar dating. The websites reveal emphasis on money and luxury, mentorship, and sex appeal, and the women, while addressing all there of these topics, also discuss worldview and potential conflicts, dangers and drawbacks, and human agency.
Introduction
How do people take the resources they have in the environments they inhabit and work toward surviving and creating security in a precarious, uncertain world? To what extent do people societally viewed as victims actually understand their position as one of agency and
choice? The eight women studied here understand sugar dating as enabling them to get what they
need in the present moment. They come primarily from a generation of digital natives
accustomed to online dating and delayed life milestones like home ownership and marriage,
saddled with unrepayable student debt, and not guaranteed job security or a stable, single-career
pathway like their grandparents’ generation had generally received. Their decisions to begin,
continue or even quit sugar dating reflect their strategies to succeed in this anxious environment.
The present and future they are building for themselves through sugar dating do not necessarily
look healthy or socially connected, and reveal isolation and short-term goals, yet sugar dating as
a strategy of survival has become normalized to them.
During their college experience, they all made the decision to sugar date; despite their
many privileges, they accepted the potential stigma and dangers of affiliation with something 64
largely viewed by the public as sex work. Opinions on sex work, even within feminism, are
wrought with disagreement and sex workers are treated as deviant criminals or exploited victims.
The many assumptions about sex workers include them having no job skills, having no other
choice, being trafficked, having low impulse control, being addicted to drugs, being unable to
think critically, or simply being lazy.
How do young, educated, middle-class women understand and describe their decision to willingly endure some of this stigma as sugar babies: as victims of circumstances or as active agents creating their lives and pursuing goals? The interview participants focus on personal agency and describe healthy upbringings, families, friendships, and communal involvement.
Three main themes were gathered from the websites regarding the benefits of sugar dating and appeal to potential sugar babies across the German and American cultures: money and luxury, mentorship, and sex appeal. Three overarching themes were drawn from their interviews: worldview and potential conflicts, dangers and drawbacks, and agency. All of these themes impacted the women’s explanations of their decisions about sugar dating, their experiences and their ability to exert their own agency in different situations.
Sugar Dating Website Descriptions and Themes
Layout
Despite shared purposes, the German and American websites are fairly different on first glance. The seeking.com homepage does not waste words. At just over 150 words in classic fonts
(Times New Roman and Sans Pro) and set against a crisp white background, the details are brief and a single picture, six main icons and a set of logos all serve to further intrigue rather than inform (see Figure 1). Three separate red or white buttons (matching the minimalist black, white, grey, red color scheme) reading “join free” are included the word count (seeking homepage). 65
Figure 1
Screen Capture of Seeking.com
Note. Seeking.com (n.d.).
Apart from the these, there are twelve links to other pages: two tab options at the top of the page, two after scrolling down in the middle of the page, and eight tabs at the bottom. The entire page can be viewed in one swift glance or scroll. The layout contrasts starkly with
Mysugardaddy.de.
The Mysugardaddy.de homepage does not shy away from elaborate text descriptions,
(amounting to over 4,200 words, all in the same Ariel font). The vaguely colorful website set on a black background includes a jumble of elements including a moving tape of news outlets on which the site has been featured, a short (one minute) video, photo testimonials and a long text box near the bottom which awkwardly scrolls separately from the main site (see Figure 2). The homepage for Mysugardaddy.de has a total of nine links (and three additional links to other country iterations of the website), all at the bottom of the homepage. The first four relate to law, 66
user information and data protection. The third column includes a link to a virtual reality dating
simulator and a link to media coverage. The second column includes links to the blog, a
frequently asked questions section for website useability, and a news section for company
updates.
Figure 2
Screen Capture of Mysugardaddy.de
Note. Mysugardaddy.de (n.d.).
Sugar Dating Website Allures
Mysugardaddy.de and seeking.com both appeal to potential sugar babies through offers of money and/or luxury, mentorship, and sex appeal, but with different emphasis, tone and cultural contexts. 67
Money or Luxury. Both websites highlight success and luxury. Seeking.com spends nine of its sparse words on examples of the luxurious lifestyle it can provide sugar babies, listing the possibility of being “pampered,” taken on “shopping sprees,” “expensive dinners,” and
“exotic travel vacations,” and being able to “indulge” in luxury (see Figure 1). It assigns the attributive adjective “success” to all “people” whereas mysugardaddy.de allots it almost exclusively to men: “successful and independent gentlemen” (n.d., para. 2) “successful sugar daddies” (n.d., para. 7) “successful career men” (n.d., para. 15). Additionally, men on mysugardaddy.de are referred to as “benevolent, well-heeled,” (n.d., para. 4), “clearly mature and wealthy” (n.d., para. 8), “influential” (n.d., para. 16), “seasoned” (n.d., para. 18) and
“wealthy and generous” (n.d., para. 26). Exclusivity and elegance are also repeatedly mentioned.
Whereas seeking.com focuses sugaring as providing a luxurious lifestyle (not a single use of the word money), mysugardaddy.de makes financial need clear and even labels it as a dependency and a transaction.
Particular to the sugar daddy and sugar girl (sic.) relationship is the existence of physical
and financial dependency. A dependency that makes this type of connection so unique
and special. This is not a pure love affair. First of all, love doesn't play that big a role
here. Sex, dollars, and other factors are of primary importance cementing that bargain.
(mysugardaddy.de, n.d., para. 7)
Women seeking sugar dating relationships on mysugardaddy.de can expect money but also the expectation of sex as part of this “bargain.”
68
Mentorship. Mentorship plays an important role on both homepages. Key words such as
“mentor,” “established,” and “experienced” appear on both websites. Seeking.com also
highlights “valuable guidance for long-term stability” (Figure 1). Mysugardaddy.de expands on
these topics and includes the possibility of the sugar daddy introducing the sugar baby to
important people (n.d., para. 25), being a “true support” (n.d., para. 16) as she starts her career, giving advice (n.d., para. 16), helping jumpstart her career (n.d., para. 25), and offering “paternal care” (n.d., para. 4). Mysugardaddy.de also glibly mentions a darker side of mentorship, claiming that sugar babies are “easy to influence and steer” (n.d., para. 22), and only mentioning
“investing” (n.d., para. 30) in physical enhancements for “his young girl” (n.d., para. 25) because those also benefit him.
Sex Appeal. Seeking Arrangement focuses on physical attraction over explicit sex and implies the likelihood of meeting “beautiful people.” The site entices sugar babies with the leading image of an attractive man and informs the reader that the men are “experienced,” “real gentlemen” and “don’t play games.” Mysugardaddy.de also focuses on beauty. The website is saturated with adjectives such as “attractive” (15 instances) and “beautiful” (12 instances). These terms refer to things (attractive website) or women—rarely men or people generally. There are also ten mentions of “sex,” “love act,” “orgasm,” or “physical affection.” Sugar relationships, according to the German website, avoid the mundane, annoyances of other relationships. On the contrary, “no deep worries are exchanged. [This relationship] deals merely with a functional/practical meeting” (mysugardaddy.de, n.d., para. 27) and thus, women have the explicit “role” (n.d., para. 24) and “task” (n.d., para. 24) of sexually pleasing their partner, who
“expects the physical affection of his sugar baby in return” for his money (n.d. para. 24). 69
Five Additional Themes on Mysugardaddy.de. The American site limits itself
primarily to these three topics. It’s three explicit offers are success (implying both career
mentorship and financial stability), men, and luxury. Mysugardaddy.de, on the other hand,
elaborates on other benefits to sugar babies. It mentions life experience, broadening horizons,
money and financial support to ease financial stress, security, and luxury, but also mentions a
lack of shared interests, differences in levels of physical fitness, and the duty of the woman to
please the man sexually in all ways as a talented lover.
Five important themes appear only on MySugarDaddy: romance/love (and the lack of
both), choice, money, acceptability, and discretion. Romance and love are mentioned (and
decried) in over eight separate sections. Sugar dating, according to the German website, is “more
than just true love” (n.d., para. 32). Rather, “love doesn’t play a big role” (n.d., para. 7) and in
fact, completely “falls by the wayside” (n.d., para. 26), because romance in the classic sense is
old fashioned (n.d., para. 9) and marriage from a sugar relationship is “out of the question” (n.d.,
par 8). Rather than love and commitment, choice is the focus. The words “choose” “decide,”
“decision,” or “choice” are used over eleven times. There is a large “number of possible sexual
partners” (n.d., para. 11), the website promises. The many possible “skilled lovers” (n.d., para.
26) are available as partners at a price. No secret is made about money being paid for sex on mysugardaddy.de. Sugar dating is described as “a functional kind of relationship […] based on financial and carnal benefits” (n.d., para. 24). Frequently used words include “money” (17
instances), “dollars” (8 instances), and “financial” (4 instances), and references to “rent,”
“upkeep costs,” “car,” “apartment” and “needs” being covered frequently appear. Despite the
blatant transaction of sex for money, mysugardaddy.de goes to great lengths to convince the
reader that sugar dating is acceptable and one of many dating options and that the modern world 70
has no right to judge anyone’s relationship or partner choice. The world has changed, and
traditional dating is now in the past, it declares. Yet at the same time, it understands that some
members may feel uncomfortable and thus the website promises discretion. The men are
described as “trustworthy” and “honest” and a protection of one’s private life is to be expected
(n.d., para. 33).
Limited Representation, Sexism, and Disempowerment
Neither website attempts to reach out to a wide audience, and instead focuses on portraying conservatively traditional, white, heterosexual, gender-conforming couples (see
Figure 3). The websites do not overtly appeal to any gender identity other than cisgender, nor to any other partnership other than heterosexual couples. The prominent images do not show biracial couples or anyone of color. In the past, mysugardaddy.de did show a woman of color in a small testimonial image but not in the banner image. This image was replaced by white men with a website update in the fall of 2020, however.
Figure 3
Side-by-side Comparison of Seeking.com and Mysugardaddy.de Banner Images
Note. Left is a screen capture from seeking.com (n.d.); right is a screen capture from mysugardaddy.de (n.d.). 71
Additionally, neither website aims for gender equality or female empowerment in the
relationships. On seeking.com, the sugar baby is expected to “cater to [the sugar daddy’s] needs”
(Seeking Arrangement homepage). Relationships will be “no strings attached” and men have the choice between women because they are reminded that women outnumber sugar daddies four to one (Seeking Arrangement homepage). On Mysugardaddy.de, women are repeatedly reminded
that they are expected to be not only “young” but also “exceptionally beautiful (n.d., para. 36).
There is no mention of necessary intelligence, experience or even personality. She also is
explicitly told that she is dependent on the decisions and wishes of the man.
The man acts as the benefactor or donor and thereby retains the upper hand. The
decision-making power falls to him about the extent and arrangement of financial
allowance. He has the control and is entitled to stop the flow of money at any time.
(mysugardaddy.de, n.d., para. 25)
Future sugar babies are also warned that about the apparent normal occurrence that a sugar
daddy may to force sex against the sugar baby’s wishes. Sometimes a man
forgets his manners and seizes the opportunity of the first evening make a pass at the
young woman in order to force sexual contact right away. These are scenes that sugar
babies know all too well and from which you can skillfully escape by acting correctly
without having to rebuff the sugar daddy. Many of the men expect discretion and secrecy
from the women. You want to attract as little fuss as possible. (mysugardaddy.de, n.d.,
para. 33)
German sugar babies are being counseled to kindly decline sexual harassment instead of
confronting it (and risk hurting the sugar daddy’s feelings). Worse, sugar babies are implicitly 72
told that they should not report rape because the men’s wishes for discretion are apparently more
important than their experience of abuse.
Website Appeal to Students
On both sites, an explicit link to students is vague or nonexistent. Neither website overtly advertises the use of sugar dating to pay tuition or survive as a student on the main homepage.
Though Seeking Arrangement proudly advertises it on other pages (such as its Sugar Baby
University (SBU) brand and promotional material as shown in Figure 4), students are not a focus
on the homepage.
Figure 4
Screen Capture from Seeking Arrangement’s Sugar Baby University Campaign
Note. Sugar Baby University (n.d.). 73
A stressed university student could easily be attracted by offers of mentorship and splurges far beyond the means of the average heavily indebted student surviving on ramen and secondhand possessions. Not averse to dating apps and wanting to explore, students fit the targeted demographic perfectly. The website acknowledges this by elsewhere offering free premium memberships for users with “.edu” email accounts, but students are resolutely never explicitly mentioned on the homepage. Mysugardaddy.de primarily references the use of sugaring for tuition as an American trend but elsewhere suggests that its users follow suit. It also exhibits images of seemingly university-aged women with much older men on its homepage.
These references are not significant themes, however, and rather background elements.
Sugaring as a way to pay tuition appears only in two instances on the mysugardaddy.de homepage. It does not appear anywhere on the seeking.com homepage (though a Google search quickly finds Seeking Arrangement’s Sugar Baby University marketing campaign, as shown above in Figure 4, which prominently includes a student debt ticker).
Discussion
Both websites serve the same purpose of facilitating initial meetings between prospective sugar pairs, but whereas the American website succinctly implies fun, excitement, luxury and amazing dates, the German website additionally explores drawbacks, difficulties and unpleasantries to sugar dating. Ultimately, however, interest retention and usability may be more important to each website than initial attraction.
Seeking.com is enticing. It formulates the choice to sugar date as one of pleasure, excess, and social respectability in upper-class society. Seeking.com creates an image of financial safety, social class stability, professional advice and a chance at the idealized college-graduate career that middle-class women were supposedly promised when accepting crushing student loans. 74
Though not explicitly on the homepage, it addresses the financial and social status insecurities and anxieties of middle-class college students and promises a discrete, enjoyable, individualized, socially desirable solution to temporary economic limbo (Bernstein, 2007a). It also offers the chance to perform success through status symbols such as nice clothes or experiences. Though an explicit link is not present on the homepage, that students make up a large portion of the sugar baby population is an unwritten expectation: seeking.com speaks to a country where sex work is illegal and heavily stigmatized (Pheterson, 1993) but dating among the younger generation is initiated online and on phone apps, and a traditional, gendered assumption of the man treating the woman on dates still exists. Middle class women can access sugar dating discretely on the privacy of their phone (Kennedy, 2016) and build a financial safety net despite the modern reality of women (especially women of color) filling the low-paid, part-time jobs in the United
States. In light of this, sugar dating is portrayed as simply a more modern, exciting, and direct form of dating. The emphasis on mentorship and relationships also allows the site to exist within anti-prostitution laws in the United States (§2421A) because it explicitly avoids the premise of sex for money.
Mysugardaddy.de, on the other hand, is less enticing and more balanced. It paints a picture of desperation, stigma, and pressure to perform for a man and reflects a society where sex work is legal, but sex workers are not completely accepted or protected (Pates, 2012; Sauer,
2019). The language is less empowering and more threatening to a female reader and though luxury is promised, it does not imply security because the likelihood of long-term stability is tenuous. The German economic and academic systems function differently than in the United
States, however. Fewer young adults attend university because there are many forms of specialized career training available, all leading to permanent careers. Part-time work without 75
benefits is less common and less problematic because of the strong social retirement and health
care system. Additionally, those people who attend university are not overwhelmed with debt
from studying but attend college almost free (Kaschel, 2017). This creates a different, less
economically and socially precarious situation for young adults in Germany as opposed to the
United States. Sugar dating may thus be less attractive to German students (indeed, sugar dating websites are less prolific in the German speaking countries and those which exist have far fewer profiles than American websites) and another demographic may be the target of this website. It is possible that immigrants and international students on limited visas may be more attracted to this under-the-table form of income. Supporting this possibility, the German sugar baby (who was interviewed too late to be included as a part of this study) was an immigrant to Germany and turned to sugar dating because her student visa limited the amount of hours she could work and she was unable to support herself while studying.
Though the American website is less overt about economic pressures, stigma, and which gender has the control in a relationship, these elements are still present as part of the sugar dating package in the United States and the women address these topics in their interviews. Many of the participants wish there had been a chat function or guide for them when first beginning sugar dating because they had to learn the hidden conditions from sugar daddies (such as the assumption of intimacy as essential to the relationship), which initially puts them at a disadvantage and disempowers them.
It is somewhat unsurprising that the American website would be attractive students, including the eight middle-class women in this study, based on the premise of economic and career stability matched with pleasure and excitement of romance. Interestingly, however, as revealed in the interviews, few of the women in the study actually consulted the website before 76 starting. Instead, most started on the prompting of friends and did not make their own accounts or made them later after already informally starting sugaring. This implies that the website serves less as a motivating factor and more as a neutral platform which simply seeks to not present anything negative to lose already-convinced participants. This could explain its extreme brevity.
In an American society where privilege and admiration are given to the rich (examples being 50
Shades of Grey showcasing the romanticizing of abuse when the man is wealthy, and a billionaire businessman becoming the United States president), Seeking Arrangement avoids any hint of stigma by instead portraying and describing wealth and upper-class lifestyle and resembling a dating platform. It lessens the importance of the websites in the decision to begin or quit sugar dating; however, throughout the experience of sugar dating, websites facilitate the ease and normalcy of sugar dating, making it always at one’s fingertips and simulating an online dating environment like Tinder (Kennedy, 2016).
Interview Themes
Variations of the three main allures of the sugar dating websites, money and luxury, mentorship, and sex appeal, were echoed in the interviews with student sugar babies.
Conversations also touched on many other related life influences, including families, friends, and religion and how these intersected with sugar dating. Throughout the conversations, the various women addressed how their view of sex work, experience of cognitive dissonance and various life influences which created possible conflicts, and how they navigated various dangers and drawbacks to assert their own agency and seek financial stability to live up to their internal, middle-class expectations of themselves (see Table 4).
77
Table 4
Overarching Themes and the Topics Within Each Overarching Theme
Views on Sex Work: Cognitive Dissonance and Potential Conflicts
The first theme focuses on ethics and worldview. When making sugar dating a part of their lives and life story, many of the women had to confront the assumption that it is sex work.
Though never directly asked about it, many described different understandings of sex work and articulate a variety of different beliefs about the relevance and possible intersection of the two categories (sex work and sugar dating). How they understand sex work impacts how they understand their personal ethical code in relation to sugar dating. Both of these result in internal conflict and shame or pride and ownership. Additionally, the participants talked about family and religion (religious community), neither of which played an in important role in their sugar dating decisions, and attributed past and future decisions to the presence of a significant other. The flow of information (to protect themselves from stigma) is treated differently for each of these three communities (family, friends and religious community), however, and differently from interviewee to interviewee. Lastly, friendships were identified as playing a vital role in beginning sugar dating. 78
Intersection with Sex Work. There are three main thought characterizations which arise here. The women either identified sex work as something negatively viewed and distanced themselves from it, did not directly approach the issue, or identified it as something positive and identified with it. Marie, Peaches and Summer are sensitive to the stigma of sex work. Marie used her initial refusal to participate and then ultimate participation in the study to express her agency in defining sugar dating and limiting any connotations of sex work. She was adamant that sugar dating not be construed as sex work because she felt that that stigmatized it. Peaches also felt that the two categories were distinct. She addressed the conflation of terms directly in her interview, focusing on others’ perceptions of her. She feels that sugar dating is wrongly stigmatized through the assumption that it is sex work. She does not feel like a sex worker because there is a relationship involved and sugar dating does not require sex.
People think like, oh you're an escort, you're a hooker, like, something like that. And it's
like, no, because we can go, we can have a whole weekend in a hotel room and not have
sex! And like, we can! And that's just what I'm what I think, sometimes we just want to
have company. Some people are really just out there lonely. I'm not saying that's every
relationship, but I'm just saying that it's a possibility. Um hm! And so, people don't,
people don't give others the benefit of the doubt, that's what it is. […] So, there are so
many different reasons for sugaring, it's not just an escort for hire type of service, you're
really getting the whole relationship and getting to know somebody. In college, they
always said, "your net worth is your network." So honestly, I think that sugaring is just
building your network, and whatever relationships with the men or women that you have
while sugaring, that's up to you and up to you to make it for your benefit.
(Peaches, personal communication, September 11, 2020) 79
Summer reveals intense thought about sex work and its cultural stigma when explaining that
it took me a lot of time to stop looking at it as sex work. I think the world stigmatizes it,
even though for the longest time, people were making marriages based off money and
trying to provide for themselves/their family. America has a puritanical perspective still,
and it’s damaging. (Summer, personal communication, September 24, 2020)
Other participants did not mention sex work at all and imply that they see sugar dating as purely relational, with bonuses. Kat and Cinnamon do not directly address sex work but describe the relational parallels. For Cinnamon, they were short term, yet still relationship based. She admits wishing she could have fallen in love, but failing in that, decided to at least enjoy the moment.
[A sugar] relationship is just how you'd want any other relationship: your communication
has to be on; you have to be honest; you have to be trustworthy. It's everything that a
normal relationship would have, but I would say it has perks. […] Me personally, I never,
I never really made a relationship out of it. It would be like fun, like having a cool casual
dating buddy who has money. You know what I'm saying? [laughs] I wanted to fall in
love with them so bad, I really did. But it wasn't that scenario with me. Like you're just
not my person, but we're going to enjoy each other. (Cinnamon, personal communication,
Sept 20, 2020)
Nichole, like Cinnamon and Kat, does not directly bring up the topic and mentions relationship parallels instead, but use of metaphors reveals that she incorporates seemingly contradictory ways of viewing sugaring: as both as a relationship and as work. She also often compares sugar dating to a Tinder relationship. She says that she is careful on both types of dates and that the phone apps for Seeking Arrangement and Tinder are very similar. On the other hand, though
Nichole repeatedly compares elements of sugaring to elements of a job, saying, “it was very 80 easy, at least for me, compared to working other jobs, or you know. When you're working other jobs, you have set hours and a set hourly rate, and it’s set how many hours you've got to work that week” (Nichole, personal communication, Sept 17, 2020). Despite this, she does not ever mention sex work nor compare it to the sex industry.
On the other extreme, Michelle and Alina view sugaring concretely as sex work, but do not see a problem with either category. Michelle says she has no problem with her participation as dancer and sugar baby and implies that they are similar roles. Alaina bluntly lists sugar dating as a type of sex work and explains its relation to other jobs in the sex industry. She says that she decided not to be an escort because friends from the sex industry explained sugaring would fit her better. However, she says that she is still mistaken for an escort by people who do not understand sugar dating.
‘A lot of girls escort and escorting is like a one-night thing but a sugar relationship, they
want a relationship. They want to usually take you out, take you on trips so like that's all
fine, you're with them.’ So that was the prospect. I was like, I'm really poor. And they
were like, ‘well as an escort, there's the expectation of sex. But with a sugar baby, it's also
like that, but you have more control.’ […] So, I think a lot of girls get into it as a step
below hooker. So, sugar is a step before prostitute. Like you're selling sex, but not just a
one-time thing, right? […] I think a lot of people, porn is the thing number one, right. The
next level is only videos, right? I think this is the level right below illegal brothel. You're
not at the Bunny Ranch, but rather independent contractor. (Alina, personal
communication, September 14, 2020)
Though she sees it as closely related to other types of sex work, she does not see it as something evoking shame. “I think a lot of girls [think it is like] prostitution,” and thus something negative, 81
Alina explains, “and I understand wanting the money, but I have the mindset that all money is good money” (personal communication, September 14, 2020).
Discussion: Sex Work. When making sugar dating a part of their life story, the women had to confront the common assumption that it is sex work. Coming from middle-class values, this led to cognitive dissonance and though some of the women resolved this (in different ways) others seemed to prefer to avoid connection with sex work instead of formulating an understanding of sugar dating in relation to sex work.
Most of the women view sex work in rather normative, negative to neutral terms. Rather than challenging and deconstructing sex work stigma, Marie and Summer carefully build internal and external barriers to it and outright avoid associating with the term as a self-defense mechanism. Even those who identify as sex workers themselves are also not necessarily free of prejudice. Alina and Michelle both imply a belief in a hierarchy of jobs, implying that sugaring is better than some forms of sex work (and worse than others).
This may reflect how sex work is viewed by the middle class in the United States, specifically by educated, middle-class women. Bernstein (2007a) reports that even when women from the creative classes consider themselves as transgressing boundaries and claiming empowerment through the stigmatized sex industry, they remain privileged and separate from other sex workers. One’s social class translates into one’s position in the sex industry hierarchy and is unlikely to change (Weitzer, 2010). The women interviewed here still emblematize the same class-based ideals of differentiation, individualization and self-management that they characterize as separating the middle class from the working class. This formal differentiation could also be a coping mechanism or distancing strategy that middle-class sugar babies employ 82 to protect themselves from internal conflict or external condemnation: they are not like sex workers; they are different.
Herein lies a difficulty. Middle class ethics in the United States traditionally decried sex work and value education as the highest good and key to success (Bernstein, 2007b). These women, however, bring to the forefront the questions of to what cost and to what end. When class-based values of “good girls” (not being sexually permissive) are in conflict with the ability to pay for school while also preforming success to the level they were used to growing up
(getting good grades while also being able to afford looking good and having time for social activities), and then the promises of school do not materialize in immediate careers, a clash between conflicting values arises.
According to Festinger’s (1957) theory of cognitive dissonance, grappling with contradictory ideas results in discomfort until it can be resolved by justifying the inconsistency or by avoiding situations which force one to consider the contradictory ideas in unison. Beliefs about how middle-class women should behave juxtaposed with mounting debt and the lack of appropriate jobs, as well as beliefs about sex work and beliefs about their own actions as sugar babies represent moments of potential cognitive dissonance for the women in this study. The fact that, without prompting, five of the women brought up their conceptualization of sugar dating in relation to sex work indicates that the construct of sex work was something they had to work through. Because all of the participants were influenced by friends to begin sugar dating, some of the stigma and questions of sex work may have been eased in the initial period, but this followed up with a period of dissonance, as experienced by the participants in Haeger and Deil-Amen’s
(2010) study. 83
The women in this study were at different points in settling this cognitive dissonance.
Marie, for example, implies that she avoids situations where she would have to consider the relation between sex work and sugar dating, whereas Peaches and Michelle firmly engage with the two ideas and resolves the tension either by explaining why sugar dating is not sex work, readily admitting to being a sex worker. Regardless of the stance the women take, the tension exists (as reflected in the focus on sex work in much of the scholarly literature on sugar dating) and the women must either resolve or actively avoid it in their lives and the telling of their stories.
Personal Ethical and Moral Code. How the women understand sex work impacts how they understand their personal ethical code in relation to sugar dating. Both of these result in internal conflict and shame or pride and ownership. The participants all act according to what they see is right. For some, like Summer and Marie, that means avoiding certain arrangements which violate their sense of what is right.
The participants all mentioned value sets and different perspectives on what they would and would not do or consider acceptable. Summer feels a high level of responsibility for other people and does not accept handouts. She is considering ending a relationship with a sugar daddy because COVID has made seeing her difficult for him and she does not feel right accepting her monthly allowance without reciprocating (assumedly with time but also intimacy). “It just kind of eats at me,” she admits (Summer, personal communication, September 24, 2020). She worries that he is financially supporting her out of guilt and thus she should end the arrangement to protect him. Summer considers herself “ethical” about how she goes about sugar dating, and is bothered by guilt when she feels that she’s taking advantage of someone instead of earning her pay (personal communication, September 24, 2020). 84
Marie has a very strong sense of her personal values, and one of them is her refusal to sugar date a married man.
One guy who I talked to for a little while, like we did text, but then I didn't know how I
felt. He was also married, but then I came to find out that his wife did not know about it. I
was not ok with that. Because I did, like, oh, I am not about to ruin a marriage. That is a
no-go for me. […] Yea. So, I feel like that's [being married] my big no-go.
(Marie, personal communication, August 24, 2020)
Alina, Cinnamon, Michelle and Peaches all directly say that they find nothing wrong with sugaring. Peaches is not morally challenged by married men and not only does not recognize a stigma but actively sees sugaring as positive, saying that sugaring is a proactive form of network building. Michelle is also proud of what she has done to get where she is and does not hide it in shame.
I usually tell people right away, like, I let people know I was a stripper. I don't care to
mention that! My daughter found out not too long ago that I did it, and I was like, “well,
not something that I would recommend you doing, [little laugh] but I'm not ashamed that
I did it... it was just...it pays bills so.” It was, uh, so I'm not, yea, the people ask questions,
I don't mind answering questions about anything, so I usually do bring it up just to get it
out of the air. (Michelle, personal communication, Aug 19, 2020)
Though Cinnamon was eager to talk, she admitted internal struggles with the concept of sugaring in her life.
It is very conflicting. Because... I grew up... I'm always hard on myself. So ... when... you
would get to the points when I'm like, “ok times is getting hard, like my bills and all this
other stuff, everything's building up.” I was just frustrated. Like, why is it that I need this 85
man to help me do this? Or why is it that life stacked it's chips like this, where it's like
dang, I have to entertain someone in order to handle adult responsibilities, or, things of
that nature? And... but... when the perks come, it will be like, a highlight! [laughs] And so
it was always a constant battle with me. Always. […] So, like, ok, do I grind it out and
stress or do I run to what's quick and easy? (Cinnamon, personal communication, Sept
20, 2020)
Her high expectations of herself that were in conflict with accepting help. Sugaring made her feel “very high” and “very low” (Cinnamon, personal communication, Sept 20, 2020). She loved being treated well and being paid, yet felt like she should be able to pay her bills independently without having to “entertain a man” (Cinnamon, personal communication, Sept
20, 2020).
Though Alina kept her sugar dating a secret from her community to avoid being stigmatized, she was very positive about sugar dating, saying, “I really enjoyed it. I feel like with everything going on, things are tight... you might as well enjoy it! You're only going to be young once, you might as well take advantage of it” (Alina, personal communication, September 14,
2020).
Discussion: Personal Ethics. That the women engage in something which much popular and scholarly literature condemns as sex work (as discussed in the literature review) and thus many people consider immoral and wrong, does not reflect a lack of values or morality but does impact their decisions continuing or quitting. Rather than reflecting a lack of values, the cognitive dissonance addressed in the above theme may have pushed the interviewees to a higher level of ethical reasoning. Piaget (1965) identifies three levels of morality: preconventional morality (guided by selfishness), conventional morality (guided by legalism), and 86 postconventional morality (guided by the golden rule and personal conviction). The sugar babies interviewed in this present research all act according to individual internal compasses and display strong, individual moral codes, suggesting a developed sense of right and wrong (Piaget
& Gabain, 1965). They all function at the third and highest stage, postconventional morality, trusting their own ethical reasoning rather than relying on laws or simplistic dichotomies of good and bad.
The women do not identify sugar dating as inherently hurting anyone (thus going against the golden rule) but are careful to remain true to their moral convictions in different sugar relationships. Summer is considering stopping a lucrative relationship because she feels that it is hurting her partner through his inability to step away himself. Marie refused a married man so as not to hurt his unwitting wife. Those who did not express these moral qualms still were thoughtful about the meaning of sugar dating and its ethics.
Overall, relationships have been commodified in their lives though according to their moral compass, and a romantic commitment without financial benefits now seems absurd or like an unrealistic luxury rather than a moral good. This logically impacts decisions about quitting or continuing. If it is not seen as morally wrong and “vanilla” relationships are not seen as morally better but rather a luxury, starting seems natural and quitting does not seem necessary nor appealing.
Change in Outlook on Relationships and Sugar Dating. Some of the participants noticed that their attitudes and opinions about sugaring and dating in general changed after becoming open to sugaring. Peaches and Alina both now feel that if they are going to date and be intimate with men anyway (and eventually break up), they would be fools not to take money for it. 87
With my boy, ex-boyfriend, it was just like I found myself swiping my card a lot more
often then. I would like, um, and I was just like, ‘this is for the birds, like man!’ […] I
can buy my own food, I take myself on trips, on dates, you know because I can! But just
because I can doesn't mean that I have to! (Peaches, personal communication, September
11, 2020)
Alina now equates time to money.
I have those female friends and I just see them carrying on relationships like six months
or even longer and it's like you left that with nothing but heartache! You didn't even get
gas money! You spent all this time on him and it's like listen, time is money. You get
paid for training for a job. They pay for that training time. Women just don't feel
comfortable asking for stuff. So, like, in my mind, and I know some people might say,
‘what?’ But I'm thinking, ‘if I sleep with you, that's my prerogative, if I don't sleep with
you, that's my prerogative, but at the end of the day I'm still leaving here with
something.’ (Alina, personal communication, September 14, 2020)
Michelle is not sure sugaring is emotionally easy but thinks that women might as well benefit from the fact guys are willing to pay for dates.
All in all, I had a good experience doing it I don't regret any of it, looking back on the
events, um. If anything, I think that guys are stupid that they would do it, and why not
take advantage of them! (Michelle, personal communication, Aug 19, 2020)
Nichole, Cinnamon and Kat have less outspoken views but are all generally positive toward sugar dating. Nichole felt ok with sugaring, because though after starting she realized she might have to have sex with the men, she accepted it because she was benefiting financially: “they’re going to pay my rent” (Nichole, personal communication, Sept 17, 2020) Cinnamon feels that 88 she has learned that sugaring has to be approached with caution, but she does not want to imply that it is bad or that women should not try it.
So, it's like um, I would say, you can have a very beautiful experience and you could
have a nightmare. So... fortunately I'm blessed enough that I haven't been in a nightmare
situation, but you know, it happens. I believe it' something that people need to be aware
of, and I think it happens more than we know. But we just unfortunately are in situation
where when it comes to... sugar dating, uh, people don't have as much remorse.
(Cinnamon, personal communication, Sept 20, 2020)
Kat wishes she would have saved more when in college and sugaring but does not regret her life choice. Marie, on the other hand, thinks her sugaring must inevitably stop eventually, even though she is enjoying it now. Her opinions on sugaring do not seem to have changed since beginning to sugar.
Nichole believes sugar dating “makes you kind of a cold person” (personal communication, Sept 17, 2020). Summer also feels that she has become hardened. “I feel like my sense of possibility has been replaced by a sense of fierce realism,” Summer explains, “this is how the world is” (personal communication, September 24, 2020).
Discussion: Change in Outlook. The women describe a change from understanding relationships as hopeful, exciting and personal to functional and practical, signifying a reason for continuing, but also a potential for later loneliness and a disillusionment in the worldview in which they were brought up believing. A changed and more nuanced understanding of their own goals and moral grounding may be a reason why the women do not quit, as suggested previous research (Lantz, 2005). Some have come to see non-sugar dating relationships as irrational and foolish—privileging immediate benefit over the possibility of long-term happiness in an intimate 89 personal relationship. In his theory of the eight stages of human personality development,
Erikson (1959) identifies college-aged adults as experiencing the crisis of intimacy vs. isolation.
The movement in rational from seeing the value of personal intimacy exploration to cutting off true (uncompensated) intimacy because of the potential pain could be harmful in development because it could result in unintended seclusion.
The women interviewed here are critical of their middle-class ethical upbringing and realize that the values they held as children are perhaps hypocritical and impossible. After coming to a deeper understanding of their own sense of morality and the relative advantages and neutrality of things perceived socially as “wrong,” the women can approach them confidently and make balanced decisions. At the same time, however, the realization that the world is not as easily divided into right and wrong and that relationships can be so easily commodified and eventually discarded has brought a slight bitterness to Summer’s tone and an honest evaluation from Nichole.
Friendships. Personal friendships were key for most of the women to decide to sugar but seem to play little role in their decision making (regarding sugar dating) after starting. For Marie and Peaches, sugaring started as a joke with their best friends, but then a friend made them profiles.
My friend had said that she was on there [on seeking.com]. I kind of thought it was a
joke. So, she made me an account, but I didn't take it too seriously at the time. And so, I
just kind of, like, just shrugged it off, and so, I wasn't really on it at the time. […] I just
didn't mess with it because I was like, ‘what, what are you doing?’ And then I was like,
‘Oh, she actually did that!’ So. …It was just that casual and brief and then not.
(Marie, personal communication, August 24, 2020) 90
Both didn’t take it seriously at first. Peaches friends helped her scroll through potential sugar daddies and rate profiles.
Yea so my friends told me about it. […] They took some photos and they made the
account for me, and then I would sit in the dorm room and, like, go through different
guys' profiles. And then they would tell me what to say, because at this point, I was like,
very, ‘ok what is going on here?’ Because it kind of got more serious! (Peaches, personal
communication, September 11, 2020)
Cinnamon and Kat had a mutual friend who introduced their friend group to sugaring through Seeking Arrangement app, and the whole friend group started going together to sugaring parties (where sugar daddies and sugar babies meet to form potential arrangements). Kat’s first experience was at a sugaring party with the friend group.
Ok so, I know Brittany, which is my sorority sister Cinnamon's best friend. So, Brittany
is the best friend. The leader of the sugar babies as we called it. She and her sister went to
that sugar daddy. Um, I believe she found out through her sister because her sister had a
sugar daddy and she turned to his friend and then the two of them would go on their dates
and next thing we know, me and Cinnamon were invited to a party. And yes, that was
more along the lines of what happened with the introductions. So, Brittany and her sister
were with their daddies and there were just two left for me and Cinnamon so they... we
all get compensated and the two got a date. Cinnamon. The one guy decided to take
Cinnamon and the other guy took me. And we all sat down and got to know each other.
After that it went to conversations on expectations. And um, it was kind of easy, eased
into it. Luckily, he wasn't one of those perverted types. That makes the situation 91
uncomfortable, so it was nice. It wasn't uncomfortable at all. (Kat, personal
communication, Sept 20, 2020)
Cinnamon’s first experience was with a man she met at lunch, but after that she did not sugar again until the sugar party with Brittany and Kat.
I was having me a little me-date. He just was at the bar and he started talking me up. And
he paid; he paid for everything. And I was like, ok that's cool. And I was like, ‘ok if you
want to set me up on a little date then whatever!’ And then he was like, he gave me his
business card, and it was very normal at first. […] a couple hang outs later he, that's when
he basically told me, you know, to what magnitude he makes money. And uh, you know,
he pretty much wanted to take, take care of things here and there for me. And I was like,
ok! (Cinnamon, personal communication, Sept 20, 2020)
Neither mentioned Brittany in relation to sugar dating now, but the friendship between
Kat and Cinnamon is helping them both start sugaring again. They spoke together about it and when Kat found a potential sugar daddy, she invited Cinnamon to also make an arrangement with him.
Alina stepped out in her sexuality due to the urging of her friend when they first went to a sex fair and then to a porn shoot together. She started sugaring accidently though, when an older man on set started mentoring her and the relationship became intimate. When he could no longer support her, he helped her create an account on Seeking Arrangement.
I was like, ‘that's weird, I'm not just going to find someone off the internet and start
dating them for money!’ And he was like, ‘well you'll have sex with men for free,
so...?’ [laughs] I said, ‘ok, when you put it that way.’ So, I made an account with seeking
and asked him to look over it. (Alina, personal communication, September 14, 2020). 92
Michelle was encouraged to try by a client at the strip bar where she danced.
I started when I was 19. I was in school. I was actually a dancer at the time. My first
sugar daddy was a client who had come into the bar. He lived on the water and had a
whole bunch of girls who would come over and hang out with him. So… and after that,
so I met this girl named... just a girl, we don't have to say her name, I just met this girl, I
won't say her name... She, then she introduced me to the website and sugar daddy stuff.
(Michelle, personal communication, Aug 19, 2020)
Only Nichole and Summer weren’t guided by another person to sugar dating. Like
Michelle, Nichole was at strip bars before ever sugaring. Both she and Summer were vaguely
familiar with the term from “being a 20-some-year-old in college”, but discovered Seeking
Arrangement through Google (Nichole, personal communication, Sept 17, 2020).
Discussion: Friendships. As in Kinzel et al.’s (2010) research on German student sex
workers, friendships or other personal connections introduced most of the participants of this
study to sugar dating. Sugar dating seems to be a normalized part of the environment before the
women themselves began. This suggests that there is a culture of sugar dating which touches the
university campus directly or and touches it indirectly through student jobs, especially in
connection to the sex industry. Bernstein (2007a) testified to this normalization, anecdotally mentioning that in one of her sociology classes of over sixty, mostly-privileged students, a third admitted having a friend who worked in the sex industry.
The presence of a sugar culture within friend groups and on university campuses does not automatically push all students to make accounts on seeking.com; on the contrary, as highlighted by Bronfenbrenner (1977), there are many layers of influence in a person’s life. However, friendships and close relationships are very important for young adults (such as most college 93 students) because they are struggling with engaging with intimacy (Erikson, 1959), and thus, friends often have significant influence on decision making and choices. Marie and Peaches’ skepticism and caution mixed with curiosity and lack of counter-struggle may characterize many students’ first introduction to sugaring. Without friends pushing them into trying it, anxiety may have stopped them from ever sugaring.
Interestingly, friendships seem to play very little role in sugar dating decision making after the initial decision to begin. Sugar dating may place a new burden on existing friendships.
None of the participants mentioned relying on their friends for advice or support (though many of them regularly relied on their sugar daddies for advice), nor did they process sugar dating with friends. Some even went to the extreme of keeping their sugaring a strict secret from everyone except a few close friends. Cinnamon referred to it as living a double life. This implies that sugar dating could cause a partial separation in ones’ life and a secrecy which could lead to isolation, the result of unsuccessful navigation of intimacy, according to Erikson (1959). Despite creating intimacy with a sugar daddy, this closeness is manufactured and according to the website, “no strings attached” (MySugarDaddy: Homepage, n.d.) and may thus actually harm the development of natural, uncompensated intimacy with friends.
Family. Family was important to almost all of the participants, and with the exception of absent fathers, family usually described as supportive and healthy. Marie’s description of her family focuses on her father.
Well I'm one of five kids. […] My mom and dad got divorced before I was even, I'd say I
was 2 years old. So, I never really knew them being together. […] I was very young. So,
I've always grown up in the house with my stepdad, and as a kid, every other weekend I
would go to Dayton with my dad. And then, but he was in the Air Force, so he was 94
overseas a lot. So, that was like a whole... so I don't have the best relationship with my
dad, but I... yea, I mean, that is what it is. And we've just accepted it at this point, like
that's never going to be. And I think a lot of like, I'm just going to say it like it is: a lot of
what led me to doing the whole sugar thing too, is I do have a lot of daddy
issues. [Laughs.] Like, I'm going to come out and say that that is a huge a part of it. So.
[Laughs.] (Marie, personal communication, August 24, 2020)
She says that sugaring and keeping it secret make her feel conflicted when with her family, though, because it is not what her mom imagines for her.
Sometimes I'm like, ‘oh ok, like ha, ha’ and then I'm like what is going on in my life?
Like sometimes I'll be sitting at home with my family or something and my mom will say
something about other people's relationships like out in public, she'll be like, ‘oh my god,
like, did you see the age difference between that couple over there?’ And I'm like, ‘oh
god, you would die, if only you knew!’ Or like, she'll be like, just anything that she says,
and I'm like, ‘oh my god, if you only knew what I was doing last weekend.’ And really
just all the stuff. Like so, you, and I'm like, ‘ok,’ like maybe I should consider like
actually settling down and like, just getting a regular boyfriend. Somebody that I could
take home to meet my mom. Somebody she'd accept. But then I'm like, that's just...
almost not as fun. (Marie, personal communication, August 24, 2020)
Michelle defines her family relationships as close also but unlike Marie, describes her family as knowing about her sugar involvement.
I talk to them [her sisters] all the time. They're, like, 5 and 7 years younger than me. I
have a daughter. She's 13—will be 13 next month. Um, that's about it I think with my
family. I'm very close with all of them. […] My sisters know [about sugaring]. My 95
parents tend to think, like, I’m in love with this old guy, just a friend. Um, I don't know
really. The parents know but they don't... just like me being lesbian: they still think it's a
phase. Long into my adult life. So, not a phase! (Michelle, personal communication, Aug
19, 2020)
Cinnamon talks about her father as a “whole mess” but refers to her mother with deep respect, focusing on her work ethic.
My mother was a single mother the majority of my life I've very much a go-getter kind of
woman. So, I would say that also played a part in me being hard on myself and being
conflicted with my decisions. Because like girl you seen your mama raise you without... I
believe it played two different parts. I believe, my mom raised me with my dad living in a
different state not helping plus she was working two jobs. It made me be like, ok, my
mom was an independent woman, handling her own business, never asked my dad for
child support, none of that shit. We can do that; we can bust our ass too. But the other
part of me was like, I don't want to do what she did! I don't want to bust my ass all the
time and not get to enjoy nothing for myself! (Cinnamon, personal communication, Sept
20, 2020)
Peaches seems comfortable with her privilege and identifies ways her upbringing was positive and academically supportive.
My mom's widowed, my father passed away …two years ago, 2018. … Only child, not
close to the extended relatives. So, very small family, I would say, um, upper middle
class? Suburban neighborhood, good school.... Um, I mean I'm the only child so I kind
of, I never really needed much or wanted much because my parents made sure I had
everything I needed. Um... yea growing up was pretty cool. Suburban area. Not too 96
much... Yea, supportive for sure. They pretty much paid my way through school. I didn't
have to work. (Peaches, personal communication, September 11, 2020)
Nichole also identifies great upbringing and education.
I am one of four girls. In the middle there. And I have a stepfather and I am still in
contact and talk to my biological father as well and my biological mother who's with the
stepfather. I have a pretty normal family life. Um, large family gatherings over
Christmas, holidays together, nice middle-class family in the suburbs of metro Detroit,
so, a pretty good, above-average happy American childhood. (Nichole, personal
communication, Sept 17, 2020)
Alina describes her father as controlling before he left and her mother as overprotective.
She often mentions her parents or family in connection to religion, her innocence, or her attraction to older men, or her ways of self-protection.
I also wonder am I doing this because I have a daddy thing or something like that? […]
I'm definitely a daddy's girl. Like, my mom is one of the typical moms where they, like,
babied the girls but mothered the boys, you know what I'm saying? So, I had a good
relationship, but I definitely think she sheltered me as a girl. And now that I'm older, she's
afraid that she'll shelter me.... She always felt like I would be in danger because I was so
nice and giving and heartwarming that I would be taken advantage of and stuff. (Alina,
personal communication, September 14, 2020)
Summer offers a blunt difficult parental assessment.
Much more conservative growing up. Parents worked hard, we went to a private school
and were busy with extracurriculars and a college prep course. […] Dad was put on a
pedestal. Now it’s more liberal, but mom is still very religious, and me and my sister are 97
not. Dad is off his pedestal, drinks a little too much, has very stereotypical borderline
toxic masculinity. Nice man but withholds emotionally. (Summer, personal
communication, September 24, 2020)
Discussion: Family. Growing up in a healthy, supportive, financially stable family central to many of the participants’ lives, and their involvement with sugar dating reflects this healthy upbringing, class privilege, and familial emotional support. Healthy family upbringings, as well as the high level of ethical functioning both discredit the use of Hirschi and Gottfredson’s
(1990) self-control theory of crime, which is often implemented when discussing deviant and illegal behavior (as sugar dating is sometimes considered in the media and research). It posits that people who experienced poor parenting before the age of ten develop low impulse control and thus commit crimes. This research contradicts the applicability of this theory to these women. Contrary to the assumption, the women interviewed did not come from broken, poverty- ridden or abusive homes. Family was important for most of the participants and usually identified as healthy, stable and happy. Many identified loving parental and sibling bonds. The women also remember uplifting stories, joyful childhoods, going to “great, great schools” (Kat, personal communication, Sept 20, 2020), and having hard-working parents. None mentioned promiscuity, illegal involvement, or early exposure to crime or sexuality, but rather solid upbringings. This contradicts the stereotype of women who monetize their bodies as being traumatized as children and having low self-control.
Another important element of the women all being fortunate enough to come from healthy and decently economically privileged families is that they had the ability to freely choose sugar dating (and choose between men) rather than being immediately economically pressured and unable to turn down dangerous arrangements (Bernstein, 2007a). Though their choices were 98 made under middle-class life styles, their experiences reflect their class privilege rather than the experiences of all sugar babies because of their sugar dating focus was a means to maintain their lifestyle rather than survive.
Additionally, the women suggest the presence of an underlying level of emotional support from their families, making their experiences more positive overall because of the presence of strong emotional support in their lives. This could help mitigate the emotional labor
(Hochschild, 1985) as discussed in the interviews by Nichole and in the literature about sex workers by Bernstein (2007a) and about sugar babies by Daly (2017).
Religion. Religion was important to Alina and Cinnamon but was not a focus in conversations with the others. Alina talked about being “moderately” and elsewhere “very” religious. She says both parents
were very religious. But when my parents got together, they just decided that the kids
could figure it out themselves. So. Um. I did the whole, like, I went to Catholic school
and stuff, but I never connected with it. And most of my friends growing up were
Muslim. […] I'm like, ‘listen you can't tell me that anybody in the world is going to hell.’
So, it's so important to me—I pray, I'll be honest, I don't pray all five prayers a day, but I
do try to pray, like in the morning and evening. Ramadan, I do, like, abstain during
Ramadan. (Alina, personal communication, September 14, 2020)
In relation to sugar dating, Alina’s religious beliefs do not impact her decision to begin or stop, but they do impact which men reach out to her and what sexual acts they ask of her.
I don't hide the fact that I'm Muslim If someone asks me. So, I think it's more about
comfort. Like, ‘she's more what we're used to.’ Which is not true, but I'm pretty honest
with most people about what I do. So... um I don't let my community know because I 99
know they're really judgmental, and I'm already on the outskirts and stuff. I'm not trying
to be completely shunned. I want somewhere to go during Ramadan. So, I think that my
biggest conflict is that finding people, well men, that I tell this to that don't automatically
turn on the switch, especially Muslim men. They put you in a box. And on the other
aspect, non-Muslim men, I think a lot of them end up fetishizing... because, like, I am
biracial, and I'm not, like, to me I don't look Arab, but I definitely fit the "exotic box."
So... they're like, ‘can you do this sex act with a hijab’ and such. And now, a hijab is not
like a crucifix, it doesn't have any type of like religious, um, how do I put it... importance
It's literally just a cloth. It's about being modest. A lot of people think ... but it's not, it can
literally be a... uh... sheet, just something to cover your head. Just because a woman's hair
is part of her beauty and we should be as modest as possible. So, I wouldn't have a
problem to [do a sex act] with a hijab on, but it's like... the fact that they want that... gives
me a little bit of racist vibes. (Alina, personal communication, September 14, 2020)
On the other hand, religion and sugaring cause conflict in Cinnamon’s life.
I was brought up Christian. I was baptized ...in college. Um... it is crazy because like...
now, I don't I don't identify as a Christian, I identify as a... um... I follow um... traditional
African ... un spirituality and religion. […] It was way more personal. It was, you know, I
feel like I can speak to my ancestors, I feel like everything made way more sense to me.
[…] It [sugaring in relation to her spirituality] confuses me. Because I believe you can
manifest and create any income, anything you want can come if you ask. But when a
sugar opportunity comes up it make it difficult because it's like, is this a test, or is this
like a blessing? [laughs] So... that's where it does get... um... confusing. So, I'm having to 100
really thing about the scenario and think about what's happening. (Cinnamon, personal
communication, Sept 20, 2020)
Kat identifies as spiritual but does not mention her family or reference it in regard to sugaring. Alina and Cinnamon as well as Peaches and Marie mentioned religion in their family background. Peaches and Marie didn’t mention how it impacted them currently. Neither
Michelle nor Nichole brought up religion as playing a role in their lives.
Discussion: Religion. Claiming religiosity was the common in the interviews, but the presence of belief in two sugar babies reflects both a commitment to a moral code, a high level of identity achievement, and the presence of strong internal resolve. Despite religion and open sexuality not being known to coincide well, religion was an important life facet for two of the participants. Both of the women who identified as having faith identified sources of conflict, but
Alina successfully reconciled her strong faith with sugaring, despite possibly external condemnation, and Cinnamon’s internal struggles are less because of an inherent contradiction between sugar dating and her sexuality but rather because she is unsure of how she is supposed to receive fulfillment of her needs. Belief in a religion is an additional example of identity commitment (Erikson, 1959) and also a belief in morality. The struggle to convert as an adult to a religion reflects intentionality and highly thoughtful reflection on personal morals and beliefs on the part of both women. This represents identity achievement, the healthiest type of identity status according to Marcia’s (1993) four identity statuses (moratorium, diffusion, foreclosure and achieved) because it incorporated both serious exploration and a high level of commitment.
It is also interesting that both women represent faiths which experience oppression and prejudice in the United States. Their choosing and then clinging to their faiths suggests internal strength and ability to accept nonconformity and choose a harder path because they see it as 101
being right. Though religion may be more easily hidden than skin color (hijab aside), it could
still be a form of conflict they readily accept, signifying a deep inner strength.
Personal Romantic Relationship. Nichole and Michele have dated personally while
sugaring. Michelle has “pretty much always” been in a personal romantic relationship while
sugaring. She describes her sugar daddies as “friends” and there’s no ambiguity about their role
in her life.
Uh, I've dated others... um... my husband, well he was my boyfriend at the time when I
started sugaring, he was a little mad at first but then he was like, whatever. like you
know, didn't really care. My girlfriend, ex-girlfriend, um she was upset with it at first...
and then she got over it, and then my girlfriend (or my wife now), she knew about it. We
were just like casual dating, and then when we got serious, I stopped. And she never
really asked why I stopped; she just knows that I stopped. (Michelle, personal
communication, Aug 19, 2020)
Like Michelle, Nichole has dated while sugaring.
I do date people my age and I'm usually don't tell the person at first because there's you
know there's so many things going on I don't know if I like this person but if it does get
serious and um we start hanging out full time or uh you know whatever it is I will let
them know, oh, you know, I... um, have sugar daddy and this is you know what I do and I
explain fairly thoroughly because it has to be ok with them. I don't want to be sneaking
around, quote on quote dating a person and doing this on the side. I like to be a little more
authentic than that. And I do the same for the sugar days that I am seeing like other sugar
daddies or I'm dating someone I do tell them […] if I did meet the right person my age
and whatever and I wanted to pursue a more realistic relationship I would... tone 102
down the sugar dating. Would I continue a little? Perhaps, but again, uh I'd have to see
how those relationships looked. (Nichole, personal communication, Sept 17, 2020)
Cinnamon and Kat are reentering the sugar bowl despite having significant others.
Although a boyfriend previously motivated Cinnamon to quit, her current, serious boyfriend is not a barrier to sugaring. As a bisexual woman, she thinks that the feminine energy of a sugar momma relationship would be the best fit for her current life and someone with whom she may be able to deeply bond.
Kat did not personal mention any previous significant conflict between significant others and sugar daddies. However, a “vanilla” relationship in fact complicated sugaring for Kat, leading to her stopping.
I ended with the first daddy, the one I met in person, well he ended with me […] The
second daddy um he only lasted I would say till I graduated high school ‘09... uh...
2016... about 2013 right before, I think right before or actually during the time I was
getting to know my now-husband. […] He did not want to share. Um to where I had me
an in-person relationship with someone outside of the arrangement and um he had a wife
as well! So, you know, I figured he didn't have time for me either, so why not? But he
didn't see it that way, he figured that I would probably .... so, he wanted me to be strictly
um... um exclusive basically to where I was only with him because he, you know I guess
he was kind of cheating on his wife, but he wouldn't admit to it, but ...Yea the money is
ok but if you by yourself every night that's not ok. […] I was still a student... um... man...
I was still a student, but I started falling behind. I did a lot of jobs and it's different from
the sugar arrangement world where the money is just coming to you so I had to get it now
and so, I had to choose if I was going to be a baby or if I was going to continue this major 103
and not be a baby and graduate with debt. Now you know it was, I had a choice to make.
(Kat, personal communication, Sept 20, 2020)
Kat herself does not see her husband as a barrier to reentering sugaring, although he is not fully supportive. “He kind of he supports but he doesn't,” fully support it, Kat admits. “But he's too busy trying to do everything else to make sure that the other half of this marriage is still taken care of with the family and everything” (Kat, personal communication, Sept 20, 2020).
Personal relationships are a source of unrest and anxiety for Marie, on the other hand, because she does not think a personal serious relationship can coexist with a sugar relationship.
“It's hard to separate, like sugar versus regular life,” she admits (personal communication,
August 24, 2020). She’s dated while sugaring but it has never been serious before, so she has not had to decide her stance about quitting sugaring for personal relationship yet. Eventually she really wants what she considers a “normal” relationship. She likes where she’s at with her sugar daddy and doesn’t want to have to give it up. Does she have to, she asks aloud. “So… if I don't want to?” (Marie, personal communication, August 24, 2020). It is important to her and something she thinks about and a topic which even comes up in conversations with friends.
Peaches has come to a decision on Marie’s quandary, and decided that she will not date someone seriously while sugaring. The two need to be separate for her. “I'd take a break from one or the other,” she explains (Peaches, personal communication, September 11, 2020). She did date during her break from sugaring after graduation but realized quickly that she didn’t like being the one paying for many or most things. After being spoiled by the men she was with, being the one in the relationship who earned more was less enjoyable, laughingly saying, “this is for the birds! Like man!” (Peaches, personal communication, September 11, 2020). Though she 104 says she used to take breaks, she now values sugar more than vanilla. She broke if off with the boyfriend and reactivated her sugar dating account.
Alina is not interested in dating personally, right now, because she is happy with her life, but one day she can see herself in a sugar-like relationship. When a man she’s known for three or four years recently broached the topic of marriage with her, but she replied “I like being on my own right now. … I really want to focus on myself and on my career” (Alina, personal communication, September 14, 2020). But the deeper truth was that he was “too broke” (Alina, personal communication, September 14, 2020). She views all relationships through the transactional lens of sugaring. “I think now, like if I spend this amount of time with you, I expect this amount of stuff. Otherwise I feel like you're wasting my time” (Alina, personal communication, September 14, 2020). Though one day she expects to stop sugaring and have a non-sugar relationship, she says her “mindset will never change.” She also admits that she doesn’t know if she’ll ever stop. “Normal” guys do not compare to her sugar daddies. She gives me an example of her first date with a current sugar daddy: “We went out to a bakery for breakfast, then after that we saw an art gallery, … what else, we went to look at cars! We went car shopping together. All that on a first date. So like, it's different” (Alina, personal communication, September 14, 2020).
Discussion: Other Romantic Relationships. Lastly, the women in the study range from currently married, to seriously dating, to casually dating, to not being interested in dating at all.
They have diverse relationships with the men they are in arrangements with, diverse stances on sugaring while personally dating, and diverse personal relationship statuses. This supports earlier analysis of sugar dating reporting a variety of arrangement possibilities, as previously categorized by Scull (2020) and Motyl (2013). 105
The participants except Kat and Cinnamon (who lamented the absence of emotional closeness) all noted deep friendships with at least one sugar daddy. Bernstein acknowledges that middle class sex workers are more likely to share more meaningful, caring intimacy with their clients, who they usually see in their own homes, and have a more authentic connection. This was also the case with most of the sugar babies in this study, possibly a reason some of them see conflict between having sugar and “vanilla” relationships simultaneously.
Relationships are mentioned as something which might cause the participants to quit sugaring in the future, but their stories show that it has thus far worked in the other direction: sugaring may have more impact on their personal relationships than visa-versa. Alina turned down a marriage proposal in favor of continuing sugar dating and Peaches realized she preferred sugaring to her “vanilla” relationship. Nichole and Marie mention one day stopping for a normal relationship, and both express some hesitation. Only Michelle seems committed to stopping sugaring.
This suggests a disconnect between the reasons to stop sugaring and the reality. Despite many of the participants saying a relationship may slow or stop their sugaring, their actual life shows a hesitancy or inability to do either. Instead, they suggest a viewpoint that normal relationships are as disappointing or not as fun as sugar ones. Sugaring has become a rational choice and normalized in the face of economic uncertainty, job insecurity and anxiety.
Synthesis. The women revealed an engagement with (or avoidance of) the concept of sex work, divulged a postconventional moral understanding, a personal justification for sugar dating and movement toward a disillusioned view of relationships as functional, and common separation of friends, family, and religious community (when applicable) from sugar dating to avoid conflict (despite these very friends being responsible for some of the women starting sugar 106
dating). From this, three overarching patterns emerged: a negative or neutral attitude toward sex
work, allusions to middle-class values and assumptions, and a practical, hardened mindset. The
conscious turn from intimacy in “vanilla” relationships toward utilizing relationships to fulfill
other needs indicates that the women are clinging to their middle-class visions of success (an
education and financial stability), and in pursuing this at any cost, are delaying establishing long-
term commitments and intimacy through reciprocal relationships not based on personal need
fulfillment but on sacrifice. This mindset, ethical understanding, and set of goals increases
isolation but makes continuing sugar dating seem logical and necessary.
Dangers and Drawbacks
The stigma associated with sugar dating, partially through its connotation of being sex
work, is just one of the drawbacks sugar babies identify and accept. Additional drawbacks and
dangers the participants mentioned included online harm, physical and psychological harm,
financial harm, emotional exhaustion and for some, heightened racism. Worsening their
conditions is the fact that some of the women acknowledged that they would not seek legal or
medical help if any of these potential dangers caused them serious harm because of the stigma
they fear from medical, school and police authorities. These educated, middle class women talk
about actively mitigating and avoiding the risks of sugar dating and describe themselves as
strong enough and competent enough to handle the negatives rather than focusing on the fact that
these negatives should not exist or be an element of their lives. None of them suggest that the negates outweigh the positives and none of them identified the negatives as being a deterrent to starting or a reason to stop sugar dating.
Stigma. Stigma was felt by most of the participants but never directly mentioned or
termed as such. Marie was uncomfortable that people outside of her immediate friend circle 107 know that she sugared and was very hesitant to be interviewed for the project and concerned about being mislabeled as a sex worker. She mentions also feeling judged by friends who ask questions which beguile misunderstanding.
Cinnamon also admitted to feeling external stigma or shame limiting her sugaring decisions and wishing she would feel differently. She admired women who would openly go into a sex shop with older men who were clearly their sugar daddies because she herself would have been too uncomfortable doing that. “Dang,” she says, “good for you, girl!” (Cinnamon, personal communication, Sept 20, 2020). Stigma plays a big role for her and she worries about how she is perceived.
You know, because I was also used to being independent, carried myself a certain way
and I didn't want people to treat me different. I would handle my business and then go off
and do my own thing that people probably thought I was doing, who knows, [laughs] but
yea no it's just of my home girls, or ...uh it... I didn't really, you know talk about it too
much. It was very something private because like I said I was constantly conflicted by it
and it's crazy because people treat it so different. (Cinnamon, personal communication,
Sept 20, 2020)
Summer mentions feeling misunderstood as a sex worker (something which she implies brings shame with it, though she implies that that shame is not necessarily deserved). All of the women interviewed (except Michelle) mention that there are people they keep their sugar dating private from at least some people to avoid being stigmatized by individuals or communities.
Discussion: Stigma. Stigma is an intense part of the sugar dating experience and is alluded to by many of the women; they suggest different ways of avoiding or coping with it but none suggest that stigma impacted any of their decisions about beginning, continuing or quitting 108 sugar dating. Almost all of the participants had large groups of people to whom they explicitly did not reveal their sugar dating. This finding mirrors Daly’s (2017) conclusion that sugar babies are unwilling to talk about their sugar experiences with friends and family. The secrecy is a form of protection from a stigma that the women believe exists at least in some of their middle-class social circles. Pheterson (1993), in her strong deconstruction of “whore stigma,” identifies sex work as a stigma that attaches to a woman’s identity and becomes an attribute of her essence.
Blame for any harm is attached to what a man does but who a woman is, her identity (Pheterson,
1993). The women interviewed seem to sense this and thus remain private.
There does not seem to be a clear connection between the participants’ ways of managing stigma and their decisions regarding sugar dating, however. Instead, like when handling other dangers, interview participants developed ways to control or normalize it, generally through secrecy. Normalization as a protection mechanism against stigma is noted by Weitzer (2010).
Because sex work is seen negatively by a conservative middle class and even creates division among liberals and feminists, as earlier noted in regards to the German feminist landscape
(Sauer, 2019), sugar babies avoid outing themselves to safeguard from having sugar dating redefined by others as sex work and being then, by extension, stigmatized by their community.
Another method of dealing with stigma, however, is embracing it and thus controlling it and gaining the ability to define and engage with it directly (Goffman, 1959). Michelle exemplifies this by quickly telling people she meets that she had been a dancer. She is able to control the narrative and thus control the stigma. Of all the participants, she presented herself as the most confident and was very comfortable being interviewed. In her ready assumption of the label of sex worker, she implies a stable, achieved identity (Marcia, 1993). Another way of controlling stigma is creating new classes of stigmatized people and hierarchies, as discussed in the first 109 theme. Michelle has the benefit of being able to differentiate herself from sex workers by no longer belonging to the group and by being a middle class, educated, white woman. The other women in this study who identify with sex work also set up hierarchies where they can say that they are unlike specific groups of workers and thus avoid some stigma (Goffman, 1959). This strategy of stigma deflection creates a new “other” and commonality between the woman and the potential accuser.
Virtual Harm. Kat, Michelle and Marie disclosed that some of the men online made them uncomfortable. Michelle found that some sugar daddies were “perverts who right away were looking for sex” (Michelle, personal communication, Aug 19, 2020). She gives a resigned little laugh and brushes it off and she does not seem to think that they present any bodily threat.
Overall, she emphasizes that her experience was good.
A lot of them respected my boundaries. I'd been in relationships before. Some of them, if
I didn't want to talk to them anymore, they got a little stalker-ish. […] They've like,
messaged my wife on Facebook. We lived in Seattle for a while, and we had been there,
and he was like, ‘yea, I stalked her last weekend,’ and I was like, ‘you're in Michigan.
There's no way!’ And, so, they'd keep on... and some of them are really crude and stuff.
I've had one message my sister before and stuff like that. so. And I know who it is. But
like. ... whatever. [Laugh] (Michelle, personal communication, Aug 19, 2020)
Marie has similar uncomfortable experiences with men online. What she was uncomfortable with was “secretive, like creepy stuff” focused on sex, like an offer to meet for an hour at a hotel or refuse to give up. One guy she talked with refused to give up and came to her city to see her.
‘I'm never home because I drive the truck all the time and I'm parked, like, near your
house, so just come to the truck!’ And I was like, ‘no... no.’ […] So, then I... blocked 110
him real fast. But he would like, make new accounts! And like, add, like he kept making
new snapchats and new numbers and get burner phones and I was like, you have to stop.
[…] Yea. I was like, ‘you have to stop.’ And eventually he did. (Marie, personal
communication, August 24, 2020)
Alina notes two ways the virtual space has posed dangers to her privacy and options. One danger she notes is being unable to react like she wishes she could when she discovers something that makes her righteously angry. A negative reaction from her could turn and harm her if he went public. “He has pictures of me,” she explains. “So, I can't be rude to him. It's not my face, but still. So, I don't want him angry at me” (Alina, personal communication, September 14, 2020).
Another time, a man took a screen shot of her during a video call. Reflecting on this, she says, “it was ok, but that's breaking a lot of boundaries” (Alina, personal communication, September 14,
2020).
Discussion: Virtual Harm. The virtual space is both an advantage and liability to the women. It allows them to screen and sometimes research potential sugar daddies before meeting in person, increasing safety, as proposed by Cunningham and Kendall (2011). It also eliminates the need for a 3rd party to facilitate meetings or them to solicit in person (Cunningham &
Kendall, 2011; Kennedy, 2016). On the other hand, photos can be quickly disseminated, taking the control away from the woman. Photos can also be taken or kept more easily or covertly and used to “out” a sugar baby to her community, a risk mentioned in prior research by Kennedy
(2016). It also enables stalking and is an easy way to find people and friends or family (such as in Michelle’s case). This limits the sugar baby’s ability to react or act on convictions because of harsh potential virtual repercussions. Instead of considering this virtual risk as something too risky or unacceptable to continue pursuing sugar dating, the women normalize the mistreatment 111 with slight laughs and focus on how they can remain in control (such as Marie turning down unwanted advances) despite not being respected or having complete control (such as with the unasked photo of Alina). This is consistent with research arguing that the sex industry is slowly becoming more normalized by the middle class (Brents & Sanders, 2010; Sanders & Hardy,
2015).
Financial Harm. Peaches twice mentioned feeling uncomfortable with her first sugar daddy, saying “he was older and not very attractive,” yet said that she was very clear about her personal boundaries and rules with him, and he respected it. For Peaches, a major drawback was personally being too nice and trusting to demand payment.
I've had to cut off people like that, because ... um... I was seeing this one guy for a while
and then it got to the point of, ‘oh, I don't have any cash on me now. I'll have to go to the
bank.’ It was late. ‘I'll just give it to you next time.’ You know? And my dumb ass, I was
like, ‘ok! That's ok...’ And so, he's like, he did it a couple times to the point where I was
like, ‘ok, you want me to trust you, and everything but you're not really holding up your
end of the deal!’ So, we kind of got to cut them off unless, you know? And so... that was
that. (Peaches, personal communication, September 11, 2020)
Kat mentioned recently interacting with a scammer online while searching for a new sugar daddy but was too smart to be fooled. “I never want to say, ‘on no don’t do this’” she says of sugaring, because she herself sugars (Kat, personal communication, Sept 20, 2020). Sugaring has highs and lows but “we all have choices in this world” (Kat, personal communication, Sept
20, 2020).
One potential became a… turned out to be a scammer. […] And he's like, ‘well I need to
make sure you're real.’ And I'm like, ‘I need to make sure you're real! There's a lot of 112
sugar daddies taking our info scamming us!’ And he's like, ‘I have a business account.
I'm out of the country right now.’ And I'm like, ‘ok all of this stuff is not a game...’ So,
I'm already realizing the fact that it wasn't like that years ago! It wasn't like that! He said,
‘let me put you on my payroll. I'm going to need your ID.’ And I'm like, ‘oh no.’ (Kat,
personal communication, Sept 20, 2020)
Discussion: Financial Harm. Being scammed, endangered, or simply put in an uncomfortable position is common and also consistent with literature on sex work (Kennedy,
2016), however, the participants seem to normalize and downplay this mistreatment. Some of the women gave excuses for the men, and none mentioned reporting men who mistreated them.
Instead of going to authorities or their universities, the women imply that they reached deeper inside of themselves for internal strength to keep going.
Scammers seem like the least harmful of the dangers in comparison to physical violence, however when women engage in a sugar relationship and then are not rewarded as agreed, it can be intensely psychologically harmful. It invalidates the agreed-upon exchange, which was the premise of consent; by invalidating the conditions of consent, sex becomes rape. This mirrors the interview findings about consent by Bernstein (2007a). This sense of being brutally used is heightened when the women attempt to bring authentic emotional bonds to their sugar arrangements, as is the case with the sugar babies in this research.
Emotional Exhaustion. Some of the participants integrated sugaring into their lives without conflict, whereas others carried an emotional weight. Nichole mentioned the emotional cost of sugaring.
But the constant turn-over and the constant needing new people and being that... happy...
um, fun, young person which I am, but uh it's putting on a face. I compare it to customer 113
service or... you know being a greeter or just having a job where you know, they can help
you but they're not there to be your necessarily your shoulder to cry on, your ... um...
super confidential best friend. Like they're good with some things, but again, they're the
sugar daddies are usually doing this because they want to get away from their reality,
their family life, whatever problems. It's supposed to be fun or exotic; it's supposed to be
an adventure, and while I enjoy it as well… it can be taxing because you're taking all of
those issues away from the person. I consider myself I'd say in a way a therapist or a
good friend, a councilor type of person. Because some of the people that I met will say,
‘oh god, I had such horrible day at work,’ or you know, ‘this is really stressful,’ and it's
like, they can have stresses, and that's fine, but having to take on all of those, as someone
much younger as well... it can be a lot. [..] You know, good financially and otherwise, but
the emotional toll is the biggest drawback. (Nichole, personal communication, Sept 17,
2020)
Marie, in contrast, did not experience any conflict or feeling of being drained after sugaring or being on the app.
I feel like it kind of balanced out pretty well because if, I mean like I equated it to any
other social aspect, like if I, if something came up as far as friends I'd be like, oh, well I'm
busy tonight. Like I'm doing this. Or like, if I didn't want to do that I'd be like, oh well I'm
going out with friends. I think it was a pretty good balance with that. (Marie, personal
communication, August 24, 2020)
Discussion: Emotional Exhaustion. Emotional burdens and financial scammers seem less dangerous than stalking or physical harm yet can still be harmful to sugar babies, despite it not influencing the study participants to consider desisting sugar dating. Nichole’s comment 114
about emotional exhaustion is consistent with prior research about student sex workers reporting
emotional burdens (Haeger & Deil-Amen, 2010). Emotional labor (Hochschild, 1985) can be exhausting and limit the sugar baby’s capacity invest in meaningful relationships outside of sugaring. Despite not seeming as damaging as financial loss or personal threats or injury, the lack of an ability to emotionally engagement it may slowly cause further isolation in the women’s private lives, resulting in a lack of or shallowness in personal relationships at a time in life when intimacy is the key challenge (Erikson, 1959).
Racism. Cinnamon, Kat, Peaches and Alina have all been touched by racism while sugar dating. Cinnamon explains that sugaring while black is just the same as navigating any other situation as a black woman: she’s expected to work harder for lower pay, she’s not expected to be educated or smart, and she is put in uncomfortable positions. She thinks it’s beautiful that some men see her as “exotic,” but she also has to face men wanting “race play” or men who are on a “weird racial power trip” (Cinnamon, personal communication, Sept 20, 2020). She remains
strong in herself and her worth, however, exclaiming in repulsion, “I can't be bought that way or
be treated that way!” Cinnamon, personal communication, Sept 20, 2020.
Alina struggles also with prejudice from being both biracial and a Muslim woman.
I feel like I get treated differently than white and then traditionally black women. Like,
the ones that are like black, like you know more textured hair, more like a [name], you
get like the whole, like, this is gross, but like, hot chocolate queen or like [explicit]
black... like with a white girl, its more so like she gets treated like a baby. The cute
innocent little girl. Like a baby. And with me it's kind of a makeshift. Pigeonhole. They
want to pigeonhole me I think because of my background I think it's crazy. […] and then
they try niceties that are actually quite rude. Like, ‘your hair's so long,’ or ‘I love how I 115
can run my hands through your hair,’ or, you know, like, ‘you don't have an ass like a
black girl, but it's fine.’ […] And so, little comments where it's like they might not even
really, they're rude, but they're rude! […] They think I'm a prostitute and they think I'm
Hispanic, which is racist. And then I have to tell them, ‘remember I speak English, I'm
from here!’ […] What they'll do is they'll just stare at me like, ‘oh you're so exotic.’ And
I don't want to be mean, so I kind of got used to it, for better or for worse (Alina, personal
communication, September 14, 2020).
Not only do men ask her for “race play,” defined by Urban Dictionary as sexual role play incorporating derogatory and racists words and comments about one or both partners (fxgboy,
2018), but do not pay her fairly or intend to begin regular arrangements, something which the women see as separating them from escorts.
Yea so uh I think I get low-balled a lot. […] I'm not doing it. But I think because of my
racial status they pay me that much. Because I'm not the whole black stereotype a lot of
guys go for but I'm not the valley girl either. So, it's like, they'll pay once but not for a
long-term thing. (Alina, personal communication, September 14, 2020)
Kat also gets race play requests and sometimes feels unsafe as a black woman.
So, there's like red flags, definitely like red flags because you don't know who to trust.
And he'll be like, ‘oh yea? Well I want to meet you!’ Well we're definitely meeting in
public! There is no way in hell. And um, so ok, yes sometimes I don't. And sometimes I
don't get a fair chance because um me being African American. Because some of the
daddies are looking for, you know, Caucasian, Puerto Rican, Hispanic, Latina, you know.
Just those, um... sort of types of women, So and it's hard. But… and it does knock you
down. There are a lot of them that like chocolate. [Laughs] You can't give up, but you 116
also have to play it very, very smart as a black woman in the sugaring world because you
never know, especially when they're older. (Kat, personal communication, Sept 20,
2020).
Discussion: Racism. Women of color not only face risks and stigma when sugaring but also racism. It is perhaps unsurprising that black women who face racism in all aspects of their lives would also face racism interacting primarily with older, privileged, white men in the sugar bowl, the demographic Weitzer says is also most likely to pay for sex (2010). These findings mirror trends explored in Daly’s (2007) research that black women face heightened discrimination when sugaring. Black women report men filtering them out of sugar baby search results (filterable by race and ethnicity for sugar daddies’ preferences). They are also less likely to receive justice from a racist legal system, yet more likely to be unjustly arrested for prostitution (Bernstein, 2007). As a testament to their strength living and thriving in a racist, stratified society, the women of color in this study do not see their added difficulties and risks as a significant enough barrier to quit sugar dating, but rather just work harder.
Violent Harm. Though all the participants mentioned/identified men who made them uncomfortable, from small annoyances to serious physical and emotional danger or harm, only
Cinnamon felt that this impacted their views on sugaring in general or their decision to pause.
He was into kink... […] I was exploring it with him, but there were times when I was
like, ‘this is not my thing.’ I just can't... you know what I'm saying? And he would get
like, irritated at you and whatever like ‘you dirt!’ But ‘you can you can get a prostitute
for all that!’ You know what I'm saying? Like guy, no. But... And I had to... actually... I
always feel bad saying this... well, I shouldn't say I feel bad, but I try to warn people
because they are like, what? […] Well one time... without my permission... um, he... 117
[violated her] …And I was very irritated by that... you know like it was very much a
thing where… you know... we had to stop and like... I remember I was in a very... very
deep agreement because it was one of those things where it was like, ‘hey I, didn't tell
you I like that’ and you know-- That's not ok! You know what I'm saying you can't spring
something like that on people! [laughs] You just can't! And um, he... at first was...
seemed irate... […] And I, well I already had... like... previous sexual traumas and things
like that during college. ...So, it was like, you don't even know how much of a trigger that
is for me at that point because this was like, before I had to go into like therapy and such.
And I hadn't healed from the situation. So, I'm losing it, he's losing it. ...You know? All
these other things where it was to the point where he's we're yelling at each other he's
grabbing my arm. It's like... all kinds of, ‘who do you think you are’ at this point.
(Cinnamon, personal communication, Sept 20, 2020)
She ends the description of the events with a conclusion
It is, it is [scary]. That's why I've been telling people, you know, it has highs, but if you're
not with the right person there are times you're going to run into some traumatic
experiences. (Cinnamon, personal communication, Sept 20, 2020)
Alina has had a lot of negative experience and yet combats it with a reliance on her senses and self-defense preparedness. She is “big for a girl” and can “intimidate people into acting right toward” her (Alina, personal communication, September 14, 2020).
I have a taser. I have one of those things like you push in an alarm. And I have this thing
from Ebay—actually it's like a steel ball at the end on a keychain. You can clock
somebody with it. So, I'm careful, but […] the most important thing is your senses. If you 118
feel that something is off, all the money is not worth it. (Alina, personal communication,
September 14, 2020)
One example of following her senses is when she turned down a trip to Greece.
And I'm just like, he's showing me all these pictures. Greece is so beautiful! I want to go
to Greece! But then he was like, ‘I don't want anyone to be all up in our business. You
can't tell anyone where we're going to be at.’ And I'm like, ‘no, that's not going to
happen.’ Because for safety reasons, at least two other people are on it. Which he doesn't
know are my siblings, but I know. The fact that he said that was like a red flag for me.
(Alina, personal communication, September 14, 2020)
Only once did something go very wrong for Alina. Alina was sharing a hotel room with a friend, and the friend’s sugar daddy (a drug dealer) pulled a gun on her.
I walk in and [explicit] he grabs a gun and points it at me. […] I was so scared I didn't
react. That's how scared I was! My dad was a professor, and like, like, I'm not used to
this! In high school I had a curfew, I had to be home by 8! So. I'm like, what the fuck did
you get up to? He was like, ‘my bad, you're ok.’ […] I was shaken up so bad. He could
have blown my head off. That was before I started sugaring. I was unknowingly sugar
dating. I stopped being friends with her after that situation because I felt like she was
being too reckless. (Alina, personal communication, September 14, 2020)
Nichole and Peaches never ran into a situation as dangerous. Nichole emphasizes that
90% of the people she met are “really nice,” good people. She emphasizes kindness over revulsion, yet her description of intimate dates reveals personal vulnerability.
Maybe the first interaction goes really well but then I meet with them for a second time,
and we either spend the night or something else, and they... just their demeanor changes 119
behind closed doors, their personality changes. And it's like, ‘oh, you talked about this,
but then....’ You know? ‘And the on this date your personality has changed, and you're
not what I thought you were going to be. And I don't like how you're talking to me now,
the way you think this is how it's going to work.’ Again, similar to dating, you might start
dating someone and then you know the personality flips, or you know, a different scenery
changes the personality. So, I've had that happen a few times. And again, I don't know if
it's because of I tend to find a lot of people that I meet are on that site because they might
be socially awkward or not know how to talk to women or things like that. So, I take that
into account. (Nichole, personal communication, Sept 17, 2020)
Discussion: Violent Harm. From murder to rape, though most of the women’s stories
were positive and safe, the possible dangers of sugar dating they reported are serious. Despite
this, a reliance on normalization and self-reliance (as a defense against physical and emotional
vulnerability) seemed prevalent in the tones and follow up comments to dangers and the negative stories were generally not a deterrent to continuing sugar dating.
This normalizing response of acceptance to serious danger corresponds to middle-class
values of self-reliance, independence, and creative ways of self-driven success. Needing help can
be perceived as a weakness and would require admitting that that one could not succeed
independently and was not skilled or hard working enough to succeed. Instead, consistent with
research, sugaring may be seen as a stop-gap alternative to admitting a need for help (Lantz,
2005). It requires openness to ask for help and face possible refusal. This suggests a distantiation,
where closeness (and vulnerability) is deliberately eschewed out of fear of rejection, the opposite
of intentional intimacy in Erikson’s (1959) developmental stages. Rather than reaching out for
help, the women demonstrate a reliance on personal forms of self-defense, attention to their 120
senses, and a tough skin, despite this not being enough to protect them if ever faced with serious
danger.
Similarly to the hardened attitude about the world that some of the women mentioned having developed from sugar dating, an acceptance of mistreatment as part of life may be a result of sugar dating and an act of self-protection against rejection via stigma, as addressed earlier.
Cinnamon does not think victims are treated well (or even considered victims) by universities, healthcare providers and authorities if their trauma can be linked to sugar dating, echoing similar conclusions about sex worker treatment drawn by Farley (2004). This would be a deterrent for
women to come forward. It may lead to internalization of fault or guilt if the victim and not the
perpetrator is given blame and shamed for his or her lifestyle. Twinkle (an initial participant
interviewed for the research and then excluded from the data because she did not fit the
qualification of having graduated or stopped school) emphatically emphasized this finding by
admitting almost no one knows about her sugar dating, and she is afraid to mention it to her
councilor or any health professional because out of fear of how they will react. Instead of
building intimacy in her life through self-disclosure (or even accessing proper health care and
mental health services), the women are possibly forced into isolation and personal self-defense mechanisms when sugaring to protect themselves from harm.
This behavior is an example of normalcy bias, where people minimize or disbelieve the possible disaster associated of an approaching danger. Admitting that the dangers were serious would suggest that quitting sugar dating is necessary, yet the women have committed themselves to using sugaring to achieve stability in life, and most are not willing to entertain the thought of quitting without an immediate reason. Instead, they focus on sugar dating as their innovative path 121 to surviving uncertain finances and jobs markets and do not let themselves fixate on potential dangers.
Synthesis. Despite all the participants having at least one negative interaction with a potential sugar daddy and some having experienced very violent or dangerous situations, none of them felt that danger was reason to quit and instead, actively downplay the ramifications and normalize their experiences. This normalization is possibly a coping mechanism (Weitzer, 2010), way to navigate stigma (Goffman, 1959), and handle racism, and responds to middle class values of self-reliance and independence (Bernstein, 2007).
Human Agency
The women in this study all identify moments of agency in their decisions regarding sugar dating. As educated, relatively economically privileged women, their decisions were based on the lives they wanted for themselves, and sugar dating was not a choice forced upon them due to an utter lack of viable options. They expressed their agency in making decisions to better their financial situation and knowledge about the world, express and explore their sexuality, enjoy and celebrate female pleasure and power in relationships, maintain control over their lives and circumstances, and control the narrative about their actions and identity.
Finances. Finances played a central role for some of the women in their decisions to start sugaring, though in different ways. Peaches and Alina emphasize their desire to not burden their families financially. Peaches mentioned that she didn’t feel comfortable asking her parents for spending money. After graduating she reports having to work three jobs to keep afloat and being overwhelmed.
Ok, so pros. The financial benefit of it. Um because I don't know I just like shopping and
because my parents were paying for my tuition and everything so if I wanted money for 122
anything, like if I wanted to go to Chipotle or if I wanted to get some new shoes. Like I
didn't really want to keep asking them because they were like, ‘well, we paid for your
tuition already, you know.’ So, I guess more spending money for me. (Peaches, personal
communication, September 11, 2020)
Peaches’ thinking about sugaring was transformed. After proving to herself that she could be independent she felt able to enjoy that others were willing to provide for her.
After graduation I automatically cut the other guys out because I was like I'm going my
own way, I'm going to start working. So, I don't really need any money from anybody
else, you know? So, I started working three jobs and um, well two jobs but it was really
three jobs, I was really working three jobs and just like super busy because I'm an adult
now. […] I lost financially but I gained in the fact that I know I can take care of myself. I
can pay my own rent, I can buy my own food, I take myself on trips, on dates, you know
because I can! But just because I can doesn't mean that I have to! And so, that's why [I]
reactivated that account, girl! (Peaches, personal communication, September 11, 2020)
Alina is firm about not wanting gifts or fancy accessories from arrangements, saying, “I don't want you to buy me any necklace. I have earrings. Like I need money. … That's what I'm here for, that's like, I just want to get my debt down so to the point where my credit score is back in like the mid-700s.” She frames her work in not wanting to burden her family.
But to me I think it's not the emotional but the financial security. because I came from a
pretty well off, my father was making six figures. And then after my parents got
divorced, that really was like, security pulled out from underneath me. And I had to fend
more for myself financially. So ... I mean, my mom will do what she has to, but I don't 123
want to put an additional burden on her. (Alina, personal communication, September 14,
2020)
She also says that the financial is less important than mentorship, however. “From what I've heard from other sugar babies that I've talked to,” she says, “the number one objective is money.
For me it's experience and connections.” Alina thinks that when her credit score is higher and her debt and car is paid off she might consider stopping. She reports enjoying the financial (as well as other) benefits of sugaring though, and if she stops, she expects these elements to still be important in any future no-sugar relationships.
Like I need money. I can give you the account number, you can pay it, but I need money.
That's what I'm here for, that's like, I just want to get my debt down so to the point where
my credit score is back in like the mid-700s, I think that might be when I stop, but I'm so
used to it now I don't know that I'll ever fully stop. (Alina, personal communication,
September 14, 2020)
Marie and Nichole worry about paying bills and student loans. Nichole focuses on paying off her college debt, paying rent, and having a supplemental income. As a science major, she did not have much free time. Sugaring was a faster, easier way to make money around her class schedule.
I think it was just money. The financial spot of being in college and realizing I had a lot
of big things that I had to pay for. I had a geology field camp that was coming up in a
year that was very expensive and other classes and certifications and I just didn't like
being a poor college student anymore, I suppose. […] The biggest benefit I would say
would be the financially freedom and personal freedom, I suppose? And by that I mean,
since I'm making a certain amount of money and making it in a faster fashion that I may 124
have doing something else, being able to pay off loans and use that financial advice from
the sugar daddy to push myself forward that some of my cohort that are at a similar age.
So being able to pay off those loans and open those credit cards and up that credit score
and just being more financially stable. (Nichole, personal communication, Sept 17, 2020)
Marie claims to want money toward bills instead of gifts but has not yet successfully negotiated that. She explains how she had to pay her own way through school through loans.
He'll ask what I want, and it's like gifts verses like actually allowances like money. So,
like, I'll send of picture of something and like, I'll get it. So, like, that way. […] [laughs] I
mean, I don't know. I mean, I really appreciate the gifts! I do, I mean I ask for like
whatever I want! And it's great. But also, I'm like, my electric bill could also really use
being paid. (Marie, personal communication, August 24, 2020)
Cinnamon relied on her sugar daddies when she felt stressed about making bill payments on time but also enjoyed the lifestyle, saying, “it benefited me through um... you know, paying my bills. It's benefited me through getting nice materialistic things. Bling. Like luxury of that nature. Also, just knowledge.” Michelle also balanced practical help with luxuries. She makes a clear link between her pregnancy and sugar dating. “I was still in school when I had a child. And so, I needed help because her father left ...and these gentlemen stepped up. No, it's fine. Um, these gentlemen stepped up” (Michelle, personal communication, Aug 19, 2020). Yet elsewhere,
Michelle admits that sugaring was more about wants and a lifestyle.
I think I have a shopping problem. [laugh] I know I do! It was more of a shopping issue. I
couldn't buy the ten pairs of shoes I wanted […] I wish I would have, uh, paid off my
student loans with the money I made because I stupidly spent all the money that I was 125
given as gifts, stuff like that so... I wish I would have... I wish I would have spent the
money wisely. (Michelle, personal communication, Aug 19, 2020)
Finances played a secondary role for Michelle stopping.
I didn't really set out to stop. It was just, I didn't really need that financial help anymore, I
guess you'd say. I was done with school, my wife was making, well my girlfriend, at the
time she was making great money, so I didn't need to have that extra income. Well, it was
an adjustment money-wise. I was used to having an abundance of money. So, I had to cut
back on shopping and doing things that I liked, uh, it was more shopping. (Michelle,
personal communication, Aug 19, 2020)
On the other end of the spectrum, money did not impact Kat’s decision to stop sugaring, but she sees her and her husband’s current struggle to provide financially for their family as an important factor encouraging her back into the bowl (the other motivational factor being financial counseling to learn how to save and invest better).
With the corona virus and everything, everything has slowed down. Money, furlough,
you have to be approved for unemployment and my information was still pending, so .... I
just think you know what. That's been since March 18th. So, I gave up on trying to get
unemployment and just filed for jobs until I found the right one and that's where we are
today. You know, trying to make it and trying to get a little extra help. (Kat, personal
communication, Sept 20, 2020)
Cinnamon too did not quit for financial reasons, but she is motivated to return because it would pay bills and allow her financial security to focus on her business. The pandemic economy, which cost Cinnamon her job and Kat her job and unemployment benefits due to processing backlog, has also slowed Nichole down. 126
Now I'm considering it in terms of... handling that way my bills and rent would be
covered and I could focus on building my business. I'd defiantly consider it. […] Like yo,
I need money right now. I need things handled, and ideally, I don't want to work, I'd
rather just focus on my business. And that would be the best scenario for me, if I could
get a monthly allowance, and have my bills and things covered. That way, the money I do
make would be funding into what I do. That would be 100% the ideal scenario.
(Cinnamon, personal communication, Sept 20, 2020)
Nichole decided to study for extra certifications when hiring in her field was frozen due to
COVID, and she realized she could pay off her student loans faster if she sugared after her day job shifts.
Discussion: Finances. Though finances or nice gifts were interwoven with the sugar experience for all of the participants, as evidenced as an important part of sugar dating by the seeking.com (n.d.) description, money was not the main reason given for quitting. Only one of the eight participants (Michelle) implied that they felt unable to stop due to financial dependency but stopped for a girlfriend, the financial side simply enabled the change. Likewise, friends, rather than economics motived the majority to start, however the desire to better their financial standing was indeed the reason why four of the women returned to sugar dating after taking a break. Money is also why others never quit. This indicates that finances are involved, as additional security in a precarious economic climate rather than as a main source of income, a finding consistent with research by Lee et al. (2016). It also suggests a change in mindset from the initial college graduate, committed to making it on her own, to a world-wearier realist.
None of the women portray themselves as helpless or victims of their circumstances; they do not see their choices as wrong and seek excuses. Instead, almost all of the participants spoke 127 of a level of financial privilege growing up. None mentioned financial hardship, and all were at least able to start college. Despite similar financial backgrounds, the women approached the finances of sugaring differently. Some focused on paying bills and necessities, whereas other focused on splurge items they could not otherwise have afforded.
The women may be using sugaring to maintain a lifestyle they were used to as children, consistent with literature on sugar dating in Japan (Lee & Shek, 2013). Despite good education, unemployment has exponentially increased during the pandemic and recent college graduates are no longer guaranteed well-paid jobs even in the best of economies, and certainly not immediately upon graduation. If a graduate gets a job, it is likely to be insecure, without benefits and underpaid. Bernstein (2007) identifies the modern economy as intensely impacting the middle class by creating a stratified job field where full-time, well-paid, salaried jobs are increasingly rare. Women, especially women of color, get pushed into the temporary, under-paid positions.
Yet a normalized image of post-college success still exists and prepares believing graduates to feel like failures if they cannot immediately enter their desired career.
Mentorship. Sugar daddies sometimes (but not always) acted as mentors, advisors, financial planners, and career guiders. Alina, Peaches, Cinnamon, and Nichole emphasize mentorship. Alina claimed that her top priority in sugaring was always mentorship, experience and connections. She relies on her first sugar daddy for professional advice, such as with her resume.
I want to go into IT. Most of the guys who contact me work in IT or IT-adjacent. So, like
maybe they can't get me a job but they can help with my resume. They can tell me how
what certs to get. […] I think that's because my first dynamic, he started as a mentor, and 128
until this day, even though we don't have that kind of relationship anymore. (Alina,
personal communication, September 14, 2020)
Peaches also relies on past sugar daddies for help with financial decisions she doesn’t know much about. "I don't understand taxes, or I don't understand the stock market, you know?
He teaches me about all those things and like, lets me know how to maneuver certain situations.
So, they’re [sugar daddies] really good for advice giving” (Peaches, personal communication,
September 11, 2020). Cinnamon didn’t make mentorship her goal yet felt that it benefited her greatly. The men she met were wealthy and successful and she humbly says, “I always will give them credit for teaching me the game on a different level. You know someone who I may have not normally been able to rub elbows with people and things of that nature” Cinnamon, personal communication, Sept 20, 2020. Nichole did not start sugaring for mentorship but appreciates that the men she’s with are “more experienced financially [and] worldly” and can help her with finances or career decisions from a different perspective than her parents (Nichole, personal communication, Sept 17, 2020). She says mentorship was
not as much at the beginning but like I mentioned not what I went in for initially. But
through the time that I've been on there I can definitely take out a handful of people that
have helped me in a variety of different areas such as I've talked to some of them about
setting up an IRA. Like some of my sugar daddies helped me with setting up, like social
security, IRA... um... savings accounts. (Nichole, personal communication, Sept 17,
2020)
Marie, on the other end of the spectrum, is firm that she won’t mix mentorship with sex. One potential sugar daddy tried to cajole her with promises of a job in her field, but she was very firm that she was would love career guidance, but not if this entails sex. 129
He was like, ‘but I'll mentor you, you're a criminal justice student and I'll help you get in
when you graduate.’ And I'm like, ‘stop.’ He's like, ‘my son's a police officer now and
my daughter-in-law works there and we'll just get you in.’ and I'm like, ‘no... no... no.
That's not how this is going to go.’ […] See, that's [mentorship’s] something I could be
okay with. Like, but also I think it is, if I go down that path, then it strictly has to be that
path almost, like I don't... if that guy would have been like, ‘oh, I was the police chief for
the [city] police department. Let me share my experiences, and like, help you.’ That
would have been great! But also, then like, let's not... you try to cheat on your wife and
you're trying to get me in the back of your semi-truck! You know? (Marie, personal
communication, August 24, 2020)
Michelle did not mention a mentorship role, but she did mention just deep friendships she could rely on for help and feeling cared for by her sugar daddies. Kat wishes she could have gotten more mentorship but felt that the men she sugared for were too busy with their own lives to have time for her in that way. Now that she is starting to sugar again though, she says she is making mentorship her top priority.
This time around the mentorship [drives me to come back]. Um, I really want to, you
know, I want to pick a few brains and get some answers. Um, you know, I've ... I would
say that that is my main thing, you know, including the financial help. Because then I
could you know utilize the financial help to make the main goal is to pick their brains and
get information to mold the way I need to mold so I do not have to worry about
depending on someone else. (Kat, personal communication, Sept 20, 2020)
On the other hand, though, it sounds like her main arrangement with her first sugar daddy is focused on financials and intimacy. 130
He has a baby local to him, and um, he wants to add two more babies to his little haram
[laugh] his collection. […] Not as creepy but... um... he agreed to the allowance that I
requested. He did also offer to pay it in cash at the first meet and greet, and he is willing
to come to Ohio and get two separate rooms for my sister and I and also for him to be
able to go back and forth. It's not the best arrangement, but at least I know I'm safe,
because I have someone there with me. (Kat, personal communication, Sept 20, 2020)
Discussion: Mentorship. A few participants verbally eschewed the implication that finances motived their sugar dating and claimed mentorship as the top priority, but the underlying reality they reveal throughout the conversation was that none would sugar date for only mentorship. This is consistent with research by Haeger and Deil-Amen (2010) about money
(as well as time) being the main motivating factors. Even among those who stated that mentorship was of upmost importance, the narratives became conflicting and self-contradictory.
Kat, for example, says mentorship is her goal, but then tells about the sugar daddy she chose, who does not seem interested in mentorship. Alina too says that her priority is mentorship yet describes potential sugar daddies who seem to only provide financial benefits, and she emphasizes discontinuing sugar daddies who do not pay. Of the women prioritizing mentorship in their arrangements, none of the women implied that they would sugar date simply for mentorship. This could imply that financial support or material gifts are assumed in all relationships, and mentorship is more of an additional goal of some sugar babies.
The contradictory narratives in regard to priority of financial recourses and career guidance could also reflect that most of the interview participants did not actively seek to sugar date to solve a specific problem but rather stumbled into it through friends’ urgings. The reasons for starting may never have really existed or they may never have been cognizant of why they 131 decided to say yes and let it happen. This could also be linked to the relative lack of social barriers through online dating (Kennedy, 2016)—the social anxiety of approaching someone in public is gone, and this with less to lose, it is easier to make an account and suddenly be talking about a sugar arrangement than approaching and then negotiating with a stranger in person.
This outdated middle-class assumption that college is the key to success, along with the conservative middle-class ideology that people can “pull themselves up by their bootstraps” if they just worked hard enough (ignoring systematic racism and poverty cycles), could be strongly impacting these driven women. As student loan payments slowly became due, they chose not to ask help from family, friends, or social structures, because they have been taught that the source of their moral virtue is in their independence. Admitting inability to succeed against societal obstacles becomes a moral failure in their minds. Thus, a few of the participants admit to not being able to let themselves ask for help but rather hold themselves to an (impossibly) high standard of being able to do everything themselves. This reluctance to admit need also limits the level of honestly and intimacy in existing relationships through an avoidance of vulnerability, something important in the successful completion of Erikson’s (1959) sixth stage of personality development.
Level of Comfort with Sexuality. Alina explored her sexuality, Peaches developed her confidence, and Marie discovered her identity and desires. Alina felt sheltered growing up and before sugaring, she wasn’t really comfortable with her own body. When helping behind scenes on porn sets, people would nickname her “princess” or “college” because she would say, protesting, “I'm not staring in a porn film; I'm in college!” (Alina, personal communication,
September 14, 2020). She believes sugaring has helped her be more comfortable with her body and sexuality, though she still calls herself a “prude.” “I'm not sheltered anymore,” she says 132 slowly, “but I still have that, I don't know if it's my upbringing, but like I am like sexually, I don't know the word, reserved. Before my current sugar relationship, I didn't have sex for almost two years” (Alina, personal communication, September 14, 2020).
Peaches was and is still timid about asking for things or negotiating money with sugar daddies, bus says she has come a long way and is now a “grown woman” (Peaches, personal communication, September 11, 2020). She cuts people off who try to scam her. She also has a clear idea of the age gap with which she is comfortable and does not allow herself to be bribed to deviate from it unless she wants to personally. Peaches also never seriously dated until after pausing sugar dating. “I did sugar through college and I didn't really date like, occasionally but I wasn't in a relationship where I was like, hey this is my boyfriend, hey mom, hey friends, this is my man, you know?” (Peaches, personal communication, September 11, 2020)
Marie also feels like she’s grown and developed as a person, become less shy and more experienced and worldly.
I feel like I've learned a lot about myself... like as far as like... um... just as far as like who
I am in a relationship and like the kind of person that I feel like I need to be with now...
and like [laughs] in all aspects like, in uh regular life, not to make it weird, but sexually...
the whole thing! […] So now knowing forward, like, regardless of who it is in life, like
now I know it's someone who needs to match my energy, like anywhere. So, I mean, it's
helped me learn a lot. (Marie, personal communication, August 24, 2020).
Overall, she is happy with her decisions and with who she has become, partially through sugar dating.
I'm definitely glad it led me the way it did. because I was also, when I came here, I was
like somebody who was living in a bubble. I was like, ‘I'm not going to try new things. 133
I'm ok being a loner in the corner with a book. Like...’ It's fine. But then I care here, and I
was like, ‘oh! new experiences!’ And so, here we are! (Marie, personal communication,
August 24, 2020).
Cinnamon’s bisexuality makes her more comfortable with sugaring, though, if her partner
is a woman. Nichole and Michelle, having been in strip clubs before sugaring, were assumedly
already comfortable in their sexuality.
Discussion: Sexuality. The end of the fifth stage (ages 12 to 19) of personality
development according to Erikson (1959) is identity exploration and construction (or identity
diffusion and role confusion if unsuccessfully navigated). That some of the participants felt that
they did not understand their own sexual identity, were not comfortable with their sexuality, or
just did not have confidence in themselves before sugar dating suggests that they may have been
still navigating this aspect of their identity before being able to move on to the sixth stage,
intimacy. It also indicates a high level of empowerment they felt through sugar dating and that
sugar relationships were safe spaces for them to explore their identities. Rather than suggesting
objectification in their relationships, the women suggested a power in feeling desired. This
mirrors earlier research which found that self-esteem increased upon beginning sex work in
members of the upper and middle classes (Weitzer, 2010). At the same time, however, the
empowerment may be limited and more of a rhetorical statement because elsewhere participants
admitted that they did not feel able to ask for their wants or were in relationships which did not align with their espoused goals.
Female Pleasure and Power: “You Get a Rush From It.” Some participants imply that they feel unexpectedly addicted to sugaring and all enjoyed it, at least most of the time. Nichole compared sugaring to a semi-addiction (though she wasn’t comfortable with that word). She 134
noticed that she put sugar arrangements before personal social ones because of the pull of possible financial reward. Just muting the app can be hard. She compares it to the hope of winning money when gambling and mentions one day “weaning” herself off sugaring. She enjoys the opportunity to “interact with someone who you might not normally socially interact with at your workplace or day to day life” (Nichole, personal communication, Sept 17, 2020).
Marie also feels the high and doesn’t feel ready to stop. She finds it fun and exciting and loves the gifts she receives.
Well... um... it's a lot of fun. [laughs] …I feel like it's very taboo to talk about, but I have
noticed for myself that like, [laughs] again like I don't know… A lot of guys on there...
it's like a sexual thing. But I've found that its empowering as a woman, because as a
woman, you get to explore whatever you want. Like, you get to set your own limits and
boundaries. And like do whatever the heck you want. Also, if you don't want to see
anybody ever again you don't have to! So, you get to do whatever you want to try or like
do and then be like, ok I'm out! (Marie, personal communication, August 24, 2020)
Peaches loves the sugar dynamic so much that when an arrangement became too
comfortable, she started seeing a second sugar daddy just for the excitement. “You get so
comfortable and attached to one person that you need to remind yourself of the dynamic of the
relationship,” she explained (Peaches, personal communication, September 11, 2020). She
mentioned how much she simply enjoyed escaping the stress and monotony of university dorm
life. She loved the lavish 5-star hotels and simply having a change of scenery. She likes knowing
that she could pay but does not have to pay. Even Michelle, who has stopped, still remembers the
high she felt sugaring. She liked the money but also the social. “You get a rush from” meeting
new sugar daddies, she says (Michelle, personal communication, Aug 19, 2020). She loved 135 hanging out, being “spoiled,” going to nice restaurants, and getting gifts (Michelle, personal communication, Aug 19, 2020). She got to travel to Chicago, Florida, Las Vegas, and New
Orleans. It also supported her shopping addiction as well. Kat and Cinnamon admitted to thinking about sugaring “all the time” (Cinnamon, personal communication, Sept 20, 2020) after quitting, whenever money would be short. They both mention the parties, lavish lifestyle, and luxury they had. Cinnamon also recalls the excitement of living almost a secret double life: sorority president and good student by day and sugar baby by night. Alina does not call it an addiction, but enjoys the perks of sugaring (financial, social, luxury, mentorship) so much that she’s not sure she will ever completely quit.
Discussion: Female Pleasure. The women voiced a pleasure and feeling of empowerment and rational choice through sugar dating, suggesting class and economic privileges and the ability to control the sugar situations. On the other hand, however, this normalized behavior pattern may not be the women’s desired lifestyle but rather a solution to life difficulties and thus focusing on empowerment may be a defense mechanism, simulating
Hochschild’s (1985) deep acting in order to continue.
Some of the women create a narrative of unexpected freedom, empowerment, and creativity in being desired and being able to demand compensation for their time and negotiate sex for their own pleasure rather than the pressure of pleasing a significant other, replete with entanglements of emotional attachment. They felt that they were able to escape their conservative, normative upbringings of restrained female sexuality and felt liberated to openly talk about sex within a relationship. Perhaps because of the privilege of this group of educated, middle-class sugar babies, words like “addiction” or “enjoyment” arose frequently, though accompanied sometimes by a confused or embarrassed laugh. The women enjoyed what they 136 did, though conscious of the protentional for stigma. This is a powerful admission of female sexuality: women admitting to enjoying sex in non-traditional, non-committed relationships, often with multiple partners. Though sometimes they hesitate to talk openly about it, beginning their statement with disclaimers, using euphemisms, and rarely using the word sex, the women were able to admit that they enjoyed being paid for a sexual relationship. Pleasure implies too that the emotional burden is not too severe as to overcome the positive elements, and that rather than preforming surface acting (simulating enjoyment), the women draw a deeper level of satisfaction from sugar dating (Hochschild, 1985).
These findings disagree with research on sex work by Betzer et al. (2015) and Haeger and
Deil-Amen’s (2010), which posit that low mental health is a danger. On the contrary, three of the women in this study gained a deeper confidence in and understanding of their own sexuality through sugar dating and thus an reported an increase in self-esteem, a finding supportive of
Weitzer’s (2009) research. Shrage (1994) shows how sex work can span the spectrum of empowerment to oppression depending on the culture, time period, social meaning, and even person. It is key in this case, though, that the women interviewed had the social and economic position to say no and to freely choose if, when, where and with whom they would engage in sugar dating. People sugar dating out of a place of desperation may feel less able to turn down arrangements and thus be forced to accept arrangements which might be less empowering, less enjoyable, and less safe.
These findings also implies that sugar dating has become a normalized lifestyle for them, a finding suggested by Brents and Sanders (2010) and Sanders and Hardy (2015). The women choose it over other options because it provided a relationship, flexible hours, financial incentives, and/or excitement, benefits discussed also by Haeger and Deil-Amen (2010). The 137
concept of “why date for free if dating can be compensated” was oft repeated during interviews,
and these women revealed rational reconceptualization of traditional ideals, breaking the division
between the personal and public, or the moral and the whore, as shown by Pheterson (1993).
Rather hinting that it is a stressful or even permanent choice, they women portray sugar dating as
a default function in life that they can go back to when it benefits them.
This mirrors earlier research which found that members of the upper and middle classes
enjoyed being sex workers more than street-level sex workers and had a greater level of control over their interaction with it (Weitzer, 2010). At the same time, however, the empowerment may be limited and more of a rhetorical statement, because elsewhere participants admitted that they did not feel able to ask for their wants or were in relationships which did not align with their espoused goals. Claiming empowerment and pleasure could thus also be a defense mechanism for women who feel that this is the lifestyle they need to pursue, rather than one they specifically envisioned for themselves. Using the technique of deep acting, (Hochschild, 1985), they might by emphasizing empowerment within their otherwise limited and disempowered space (between jobs, financially unstable, trying to preform middle-class status, and practicing socially stigmatized relationships).
Personal Need for Control. Many of the participants admitted a high need for control in their lives, implying a level of anxiety and an inability to live with uncertainty but also a strong belief in their own self-efficacy (and thus a high level of personal agency) (Bandura, 2006).
Alina, Nichole, Marie, Peaches, and Cinnamon identified being goal-orientated people. Alina is
very high-stress and identifies as having a “Type A personality” (Alina, personal
communication, September 14, 2020). She was working two jobs during her first master’s to
avoid asking for help. She chose sugaring over escorting because as a sugar baby she could 138 control the level of intimacy. Alina admits that being with her first sugar daddy actually helped alleviate stress in her life because with sugaring, there are less uncertainties than with normal dating.
I think I have a control issue in my real life, I guess it's my real life. So, I'm a control
freak. I'm the type A personality. So, what I like is that I guess I can stay guarded because
I know when it's going to start, I know when it's going to end, and there's no surprises.
Like, I'll go on a couple dates, we'll spend a couple nights together. I'll walk away with
some good money and all is well that ends well. So, I think that I don't have a normal
relationship because I'm so guarded. (Alina, personal communication, September 14,
2020)
In contrast, Summer sees sugar dating as causing rather than alleviating relationship uncertainty. She says that quitting would actually offer her “a sense of relief, maybe? I hate the
‘unknown’ and this ‘will he end it or won’t he?’ feels way too uncertain for me. Would gain the freedom to seriously vanilla date” (Summer, personal communication, September 24, 2020). She desires a higher level of control over uncertainty in her life, saying, “I could technically afford my own place now for a year, but without a guaranteed income, that would be super risky. I can’t do that to myself yet” (Summer, personal communication, September 24, 2020). Summer portrays herself as goal-driven, saying that she is “using what I can to get ahead in my industry.
Doing what I have to do to survive and achieve my goals” (Summer, personal communication,
September 24, 2020).
Nichole enjoys the control sugaring gives her in her life, which allowed her to survive financially while keeping up with school. 139
You're making your own schedule, you can meet up with as many people as you want,
and you're kind of the one in control as the female or sugar baby in these relationships
because you're the one usually setting the price and at least haggling the price and how
far you want to go, where you want to go. Because I keep a lot of my information uh,
secure. Like I'm good with using my first name and things like that but I don't tell people
where I live, and I usually don't let people come back to my house. (Nichole, personal
communication, Sept 17, 2020)
Nichole also admits that she would like more consistency, in a way, wishing her schedule was externally controlled rather than her having to adjust to fluidity, even fluidity which she has a hand in shaping. Fixed schedules often help alleviate anxiety, however. “The emotional exhaustion, the random hours, you don't ever know when you're meeting people. To be able to have more consistency in my life I think would topple continuing this” (Nichole, personal communication, Sept 17, 2020).
Marie is very driven. A first-generation college student, she is academically motivated, works hard and managed to get a bachelor’s and master’s degree in just four years. She seems close to some of her professors and her tone about studying is light—it doesn’t seem to be very stressful looking back, but rather very good years. Peaches too is goal orientated—planning on getting her doctorate next year. When sugaring, she focuses on building her network and being mentored so that she can excel in her future career. Cinnamon identifies as fiercely independent and hard working. She would become angry at herself when she would feel forced to turn to a sugar daddy to pay her bills. She think to herself sometimes, “even if… we're losing our minds, we're going to handle whatever we have to handle” (Cinnamon, personal communication, Sept
20, 2020). 140
The majority of my life I've very much a go-getter kind of woman. So, I would say that
also played a part in me being hard on myself and being conflicted with my decisions.
[…] My independence is sometimes a blessing and sometimes a curse because it makes it
hard for you to receive stuff when you're used to being the one handling business! So…
even when I do get something I just I don't even know what to do, like, no I'll be like oh
my goodness! You know? (Cinnamon, personal communication, Sept 20, 2020)
Like Cinnamon, Kat is very independent. Her stress got too bad to be able to handle school, work, a new boyfriend and sugaring, so she quit both school and sugaring.
I wish I would have spoken to my mentors and my councilors more at the school because
I needed the help. At that time, I was just stubborn and trying to do it my own way. I was
kind of getting worried and stressed and then was like... "I've got to just drop it." (Kat,
personal communication, Sept 20, 2020)
Michelle is the only participant who does not mention being goal orientated or driven as a person, but her comments beguile a very strong work ethic. She casually mentions that she has worked since she was 13 and worked hard through college and while being a wife and single mother.
Discussion: Need for Control. The women interviewed sugar dating as a life default which helps them create control and order in their lives. Quite to the contrary of the image of sex workers as unable to handle money and resist impulse spending, many of the sugar babies interviewed admitted they were control of themselves and their lives almost to a fault.
Research and popular literature on sex workers has occasionally employed Gottfredson and Hirschi’s (1990) self-control theory of crime to show that sex workers commit crimes (i.e. sex work) because of an inability to control their own impulses. This theory has been disputed, 141 and the present findings further discredit its application to sugar dating (though legally usually not considered criminal). The sugar babies identified personality traits in themselves and displayed patterns of thinking and acting which flatly contradict this concept and show that their actions are based on a concentrated force to control their lives rather than in inability to mitigate impulses. Many of the sugar babies admit openly a need to personally control and design every element of their lives. A few of the participants admitted that they do not like uncertainty and sugaring is a way to have a relationship without any risk or guesswork.
Thus, a few of the participants admit to not being able to let themselves ask for help; instead they hold themselves to an (impossibly) high standard of being able to do everything independently. They attribute this to being driven people, but it could also simply reflect their middle-class upbringing into the bootstraps ethics of hard work. Ultimately, they could have also stopped school, gotten a job (in Cinnamon’s case) or stopped chasing an elusive career in the arts
(in Summer’s case). Another middle-class norm in the United States, however, is that one’s identity and status is drawn from one’s job. As part of the creative class, as discussed by
Bernstein (2007a), these hard-working women expect to be working highly-paid jobs. These women are not victims of material circumstances but perhaps of their own expectations and class-based ideals, like the adolescent sugar babies studied by Lee et al. (2016). Sugaring, for the women in this thesis, is a way to maintain a fragile independence from financial reliance on family and friends and preform success to those who do not know what this performance costs them.
Relying on sugar dating for financial security could also be a defense mechanism against learning to live with uncertainty in life and take risks relying on others for support, without the assumption of (sexual) reciprocation. This relates to Erikson’s (1959) concept of distantiation, 142
where the individual explicitly avoids intimacy in personal life in order to protect him/herself
from weakness and harm. The women reveal a disinclination to burden their personal
relationships with their needs (an action which in the positive, could lead to stronger friendships
and deeper confidence, ultimately resulting in the successful completion of this life stage). In
refusing to do this (and in instead realizing their needs through sugaring) they may be seeking
safety in control by avoiding adult insecurity and vulnerability. They are eschewing risks,
suggesting an identity insecurity and self-isolation out of a possible fear of rejection, but this may result in them not developing the value of love (Erikson, 1959).
In interesting juxtaposition with the women’s self-described need for control, the offers
of mentorship and financial comfort reveal the infantilizing aspect of sugaring. Needing either
offer from an older man implies a childlikeness on the part of the sugar baby. The terms “sugar
baby” and “sugar daddy” make this clear from the onset and create a superiority on the side of
the man through his implied maturity, his ability to guide, and his responsibility to care for the
weaker, inexperienced partner. Even the sugar dating term “allowance,” referring to monthly
payments, is a natural outgrowth of this agreed-upon world of simulated familial dependency.
Some of the women admitted to feeling sheltered as children and still learning about themselves
and the world. Peaches emphasized feeling childlike as a college sugar baby. She only came
back to it after reaching a level of self-reliance where she felt that she could accept the benefits
while comfortably knowing understanding her adulthood.
This could serve as an example of agency and sugar babies changing a prescriptive
narrative which portrays them as incompetent. Despite infantilizing language and premises of
sugar dating, the women present themselves as driven, rational, organized and seeking a lifestyle
and dating situation within their own boundaries and high need for control. 143
Student Status. Graduation was important in the initial decision to quit for two of the participants but did not have a lasting impact. Graduation did not play a major role in permanently stopping for any of the women. Michelle continued long after graduation and only stopped for personal reasons—her wife. Kat also quit for a significant other—her then-boyfriend, now husband. One of Cinnamon’s reasons for quitting was pressure from her boyfriend who did not want her to be with other men, but she also wanted to figure herself out as an adult after graduating. Like Cinnamon, both Nichole and Peaches purposefully took a break when they graduated. Nichole wanted a “big girl job” after college where she wouldn’t need sugaring any longer (personal communication, Sept 17, 2020). However, when that did not immediately materialize upon graduation (she graduated into the COVID-19 economy), her lack of a job in her field, combined with the feeling of “why not” and the personal pleasure she experienced sugar dating encouraged her to go back to the website. Peaches broke off a three-year sugar relationship upon graduating in order to take a break from sugar dating.
After graduation I automatically cut the other guys out because I was like, ‘I'm going my
own way, I'm going to start working. So, I don't really need any money from anybody
else, you know?’ So, I started working three jobs, and um, well, two jobs but it was really
three jobs. I was really working three jobs and just like super busy because I'm an adult
now. I'm not in college. So, I felt like I was definitely going to leave the sugar dating to
college life. I thought, ‘ok, you know oh I tried that in college, no big deal because it's
college, you can get away with whatever.’ It could come up in conversation. Like, ‘oh,
have you ever had a sugar daddy?’ ‘Well, yea in college, but I mean I'm an adult now, I
know better.’ You know, like something like that. But no. [laughs] (Peaches, personal
communication, September 11, 2020) 144
After about a year off, Peaches broke up with her “vanilla” boyfriend and returned to sugaring out of curiosity. Marie does not plan on stopping just because she has graduated. Alina did not stop after graduating from her first master’s program and does not have plans to stop after graduating from the second.
Discussion. Considering the women’s high need for control, it is unsurprising that graduation played no lasting role in the women’s decisions to stop or continue sugar dating
(those who paused upon graduation restarted), despite Daly’s (2017) and Jones’ (2019) interviewees suggesting that sugaring (or sex work) was just a temporary college job. Though graduation marks a significant change in the daily lives of students, the many components of the personal ecosystem (as outlined by Bronfenbrenner), the person’s own characteristics, and the economic benefits of sugar dating remain unchanged. The only clear change upon graduation is building financial anxiety due to student debt and the urgent need for a job. To this end, graduation may be more of a symbolic marker and less of a practical one, thus not strong enough to be a catalyst for change, and it may in fact encourage continuing sugaring.
That some of the participants did choose to pause after graduation and returned to sugar dating feeling more confident in themselves; their choices shows a need for control and also for agency and establishing that they are creating the life they desire based on their own needs and wants instead of habits introduced by friends when they were younger. This suggests that though their identity may not have been solidified when they began sugar dating (perhaps reflected in their lack of intentionality when starting sugaring) or even upon graduation and they were still in
Marcia’s (1993) moratorium identity status (low commitment, high exploration or crisis). Some experienced a turning point during their break from sugaring where they felt like they knew 145 themselves and had successfully committed to an identity, thus completing Erikson’s (1959) fifth stage of personality development and consciously entering the sixth stage.
Not a single one of the participants viewed sugar dating as a career or as their main occupation or occupational goal; on this point there was complete consensus. Instead, all viewed it as a means of stability while pursuing their individual goals (further schooling or financially risky career moves), or as additional help bridging the gap between graduation and becoming established in a secure career, or as needed secondary income to support children. This shows a strong sense of purpose in their actions sugar dating and a high level of intentionality and agency
(Bandura, 2006). Though many enjoyed sugaring, it was ultimately a means to an end, their way of expressing agency over their life circumstances.
Agency was key to their stories overall. Their focus on finances and search for knowledge about the world, their sexual exploration in a space possibly free of emotional attachment, their recognition and pursuit of female pleasure and power in their relationships, and even their concerted efforts to limit uncertainty in their lives and frame their narratives the way they chose (despite labels and others’ perceptions inherent to sugar dating or related to sex work) are all examples of human agency and their self-efficacy within their environment (Bandura,
2006). Accepting the premise of Seeking Arrangement that sugar dating is about mentorship as well as financial security, some of the women include a narrative of mentorship though they demonstrate in their stories the lack of practical role it often plays in their decisions. Positioning themselves as receiving (thus lacking) financial support and knowledge, the women are infantilized in sugar relationships, aptly fulfilling the role of a sugar baby. Some women fight this status and reclaim their agency and adulthood through controlling relationships and pausing sugar dating. Overarching this situation are narratives of female pleasure, need for control, and 146 expression of female sexuality, aspects where the women describe empowerment, self- determination, and agency. Ultimately, because none of these factors are related to or changed when one stops school, graduation (or quitting school) played no role in their decisions, but the original themes they talked about, such as finances and desire to be in control, continued to play a role (see Figure 5).
Figure 5
Interview Themes Relating to Participant Decisions
Though most did not start sugaring out of a place of dire financial need but rather privilege, their tenuous economic positions meant that sugaring, usually begun through friends and connections and eased by the convince of online connections, became a normalized source of financial stability, enabling them to preform success and preserve respect from their social class as independent, driven women without asking for help (see Figure 5). This rejection of vulnerability could hinder their successful completion of intimacy, Erikson’s (1959) sixth stage 147 of development, because openness, interdependence and the willingness to admit weakness (and ask for help) is important to strong, close relationships. Sugar dating enables the women to remain independent from instead of interdependent on their friends and family, but in doing so, the women deprivilege an important aspect of relationships building, key to the intimacy vs. isolation stage, and they accept isolation out of self-preservation.
This study found that the women sugar dating strongly reflected the ethics of their middle-class social stratum, and though they began sugaring generally without clear expressed intention, normalized the practice in their own lives and continued after graduation as a way to maintain financial and social stability in a precarious economy, job market and society as a woman. Though the websites did not impact many of their decisions to begin and thus the explicit website appeals of luxury, mentorship and dating attractive men were not important in most of the women’s initial sugar dating initiations. The websites may curate and form sugar dating norms, however. The women attribute similar themes (as reflected on the websites) to their decisions, including finances, relationships and mentorship. Financial security was at the heart of most of the stories, though not always explicitly declared as the goal. The women faced cognitive dissonance when struggling with the stigma of sex work and achieved a high level of ethical functioning possibly as a result of reflection on their decisions. Contending with violent dangers, mistreatment, racism, and infantilization, the women focus on their pleasure in their sexuality, their ability to survive and provide for themselves, their complex emotions and relationships, their dreams of one day being completely financially independent, and the control they try to maintain over uncertainty in their lives. They attribute their decisions to these factors rather than to the dangers and negatives and thus see no reason to desist due simply to graduation but push off the decision to quit into the uncertain future. In the meantime, as these relatively 148 privileged women sugar date to succeed in a world which is often sexist, racist and simply short on secure, good employment, they de-prioritize and delay long term things such as close personal friendships or life partners as luxuries which will hopefully come later. In doing so, all but one delay practicing intimacy and making long-term relationship commitments and risk personal isolation.
149
CONCLUSION
Summary of Findings
The women attribute friendships or a general acceptance of sugar dating within their social network to their decision to begin sugar dating. Contrary to prior assumptions that graduation would be an important deciding moment for student sugar babies, none of the women in this study attributed their decisions to continue (or quit in Michelle’s case) to graduating or discontinuing school. Finances were generally offered as motivation for continuing, along secondary reasons of mentorship, personal reasons, and pleasure. The women have normalized their sugar dating by downplaying dangers and accepting sugaring as a rational decision in the face of precarious economic situations, not greatly improved after graduation. This is unsurprising because Bronfenbrenner’s (1977) bioecological model suggests numerous influences on the individual and school is only one of many influences.
Rather than the findings of this thesis reflecting on the essence of sugar dating as a broad phenomenon, they reflect the perspectives of a narrow stratum of American society, middle- class, educated women. This group of student sugar babies values self-reliance and shows a high level of agency in their attempts to control their worlds (see Bandura, 2006), yet their decisions for immediate and independent financial stability could be impacting their later relationships and later life by increasing isolation rather than practicing intimacy within commitment formation
(see Erikson, 1959). Interestingly, although some of the participants implied that they were in identity moratorium when beginning sugar dating, by the time they met with me, many of them had an achieved identity status (see Marcia, 1993).
150
Theoretical Implications
Stigma creates an environment of silence. Because the women interviewed were generally too afraid to share their sugar dating stories with friends and family out of a fear of exposure (and the resulting stigma), most were unable to benefit from safety, emotional support,
and the ability to process their experiences without fear of repercussions. Instead they created
self-protection strategies and became potentially isolated, consistent with Erikson’s theory of life
stages. Despite the decision to begin being motivated by friendship, the decision to quit or
continue is made in silence. Not only does “whore” stigma create unhealthy dichotomies among
women who are more sexually permissive and those who are less, stigma and shame also further
isolation and fragmentation in society, creating hierarchies and otherness even within a single
social stratum (i.e. middle-class, college-educated women). Despite this, these women assert
their choice, rationality, ethics and agency in their decisions and are working toward their own
dreams and goals, despite societal and economic obstacles.
Despite talking about religion, family, and friends, Bronfenbrenner’s (1977)
bioecological model proved insufficient in understanding the student sugar baby perspectives
because their very decisions, though made within the influences of their personal bioecologies,
represented a push against these influences and isolated them within the model. Though all of
these influences are important in a person’s decision-making process, the connections are vaguer
and more hidden in relation to student sugar babies because they do not necessarily tell (nor live
with and thus have daily contact with) their families. As millennials, they do not have as much
connection to religion or religious communities than past generations, and though their friends
are very important, especially in the decision to begin, the friendships seem to rarely play a role
in the decisions to restart, continue, or ultimately quit. Instead, the women seem to make their 151
decisions in secrecy in order to avoid opinion and influence from their social networks. They
generally do not bring their sugar daddies into contact with other parts of their lives (family,
friends, religious communities, school communities) and thus the usual interaction in the
mesosystem is also less relevant to this topic. In comparison, Erikson (1959), Marcia (1993), and
Bandura (2006) proved more useful for understanding the sugaring experience through theories about identity stages, identity statuses, and agency, respectively.
Finally, contrary to much of the prior research, this thesis emphasized the need for sugar babies to be evaluated separate from sex workers because of their unique perspectives and experiences. Additionally, it underscores generational and class influences which impact all students, not just those who choose to sugar date. The view of sugar dating as a functional decision (though not necessarily unpleasant or undesirable) to help with financial need suggests the lack of stability or financial security that young adults in the United States are experiencing in relation to their daily lives.
Practical Implications
Though only a few women directly attributed their decision to begin or continue sugar
dating to finances, these women had options as documented, middle-class, American citizens,
with a middle-class social network and mostly being billed in-state tuition. This is not reflective
of the entire student body at a college in the United States. Many students may be under more
financial pressure than this group. International students, for example, paying international
tuition rates as well as extra costs such as vias and flights while coming sometimes from
countries with weaker currencies and having more legal difficulty working off-campus while
studying, may have more incentive to sugar date and fewer other options. If financial security is 152 difficult for this group of fairly privileged and educated middle-class women, how much more difficult might it be for other student groups?
If students from any demographic turn to sugar dating, do they need support from the universities to which they pay tuition? Prior research suggests the importance of available campus resources for student sex workers, even if not accessed (Hammond, 2019; Jones, 2019).
This topic was repeated in the present sugar baby interviews: even if not all of the interview participants used their sugar dating to pay tuition and most did not express mental health challenges from sugaring, the likelihood of emotional and mental strain from stigma and a managed identity could be great and the availability of support (representing a nonjudgmental atmosphere on campus) is critical for educational success. Cinnamon vocalized her belief that there needed to be strong support from the university, especially legal help when sexual assault occurs, but also a culture of acceptance and belief when a victim comes forward so that sugar babies can safely seek justice. Access to free or cost-reduced therapy is important for those who need or want it, she also believes, and it needs to be widely publicized so that students know it is available. Kat mentions that when her life became very stressful, she was too stressed to reach out to mentors and counselors on campus and did not know of other campus resources. A system of accountability as well as a community-wide policy of acceptance would better support students like her from dropping out when the anxiety of sugaring and school became overwhelming.
One example of a university addressing the possible needs of student sugar babies is in
England. The University of Bristol has acknowledged the important of services for student sugar babies and not only offers sex-positive medical and mental health services but also information about specialized external programs if the students are too afraid to use university services 153
(Horton & Scott, 2020). Directly addressing the topic of sugar dating mentorship, a representative of the University of Bristol highlights the services available on-campus for financial planning, financial aid, part-time student job assistance, and career services (Horton &
Scott, 2020).
Limitations
There were many limitations inherent in this study. Firstly, there was self-selection bias in the participants. The women who were willing to be interviewed by default would be those most comfortable with the topic and most comfortable talking about it. This means that important perspectives were not included, namely the perspectives of those possibly ashamed, afraid or especially private about their sugar dating.
Secondly, a cross-cultural comparison was not possible beyond textual analysis of websites because the gatekeeper to one German sugar baby groups decided against participating due to concerns about privacy and a second gatekeeper who was male, refused to pass on the study contact information to the women he knew because he was sure they would not want to participate, effectively making the decision for them. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic made planned international travel impossible.
Thirdly, most of the participants identified coming from a middle-class upbringing, making this study more reflective of this narrow demographic but not representative of student sugar babies as a group. It is possible that student sugar babies often come from middle-class families, however this cannot be determined from this study.
An additional limitation was the ability to use a true snowball sample. The majority of the participants did not know anyone else who actively sugar dated and thus a larger than expected 154 number of initial contacts were required. This reflects an extreme silence and lack of mutual support among the sugar babies which could be the subject of future research.
Implications for Further Research
Future research could address the diversity within student sugar babies, such as exploring international students’ experiences, motivations and needs. It could also focus on the impact of racism in sugar dating and focus on the experiences of people of color, something which this study did not adequately address. The male sugar baby experience was not addressed in this study and could lend different findings on how gender is expressed in sugaring. A cross-cultural comparison in the United Kingdom or Australia where sugar dating is also widespread, would deepen an understanding of cross-cultural trends. 155
REFERENCES
Ajayi, A. I., & Somefun, O. D. (2019). Transactional sex among Nigerian university students:
The role of family structure and family support. PLOS ONE, 14(1), e0210349.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0210349
Baker, L. M., Dalla, R. L., & Williamson, C. (2010). Exiting Prostitution: An Integrated Model.
Violence Against Women, 16(5), 579–600. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801210367643
Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a Psychology of Human Agency. Perspectives on Psychological
Science, 1(2), 164–180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00011.x
Beck, C. T. (2021). Introduction to phenomenology: Focus on methodology. SAGE.
Bernstein, E. (2007a). Temporarily yours: Intimacy, authenticity, and the commerce of sex.
University of Chicago Press.
Bernstein, E. (2007b). Sex work for the middle classes. Sexualities, 10(4), 473–488.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460707080984
Betzer, F., Köhler, S., & Schlemm, L. (2015). Sex work among students of higher education: A
survey-based, cross-sectional study. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44(3), 525–528.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0476-y
Books Ngram Viewer: Neoliberalism. (n.d.). [Ngram]. Retrieved July 19, 2020, from
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=neoliberalism&year_end=2008&smoot
hing=7&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1800&corpus=15&direct_url=t4%3B%2Cneoli
beralism%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Bneoliberalism%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BNeoliberal
ism%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BNEOLIBERALISM%3B%2Cc0#t4%3B%2Cneoliberalism%3
B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Bneoliberalism%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BNeoliberalism%3B%2
Cc0%3B%3BNEOLIBERALISM%3B%2Cc0 156
Brents, B., & Sanders, T. (2010). Mainstreaming the ex industry: Economic inclusion and social
ambivalence. Journal of Law and Society, 37(1), 40–60.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American
Psychologist, 32(7), 513–531. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.32.7.513
Bronfenbrenner, U. (Ed.). (2005). Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on
human development. Sage Publications.
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Evans, G. W. (2000). Developmental science in the 21st Century:
Emerging questions, theoretical models, research designs and empirical findings. Social
Development, 9(1), 115–125. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9507.00114
Choudhry, V., Östergren, P.-O., Ambresin, A.-E., Kyagaba, E., & Agardh, A. (2014). Giving or
receiving something for sex: A cross-sectional study of transactional sex among Ugandan
university students. PLoS ONE, 9(11), e112431.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0112431
Connop, V., & Petrak, J. (2004). The impact of sexual assault on heterosexual couples. Sexual
and Relationship Therapy, 19(1), 29–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681990410001640817
Cordero, B. (2015). Sugar culture and SeekingArrangement.com participants: What it means to
negotiate power and agency in sugar dating. California State University.
Craigslist About: FOSTA. (n.d.). Retrieved July 19, 2020, from
https://www.craigslist.org/about/FOSTA
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing among Five
Approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Cunningham, S., & Kendall, T. D. (2011). Prostitution 2.0: The changing face of sex work.
Journal of Urban Economics, 69(3), 273–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2010.12.001 157
Daly, S. (2017). Sugar babies and sugar daddies: An exploration of sugar dating on canadian
campuses [Thesis]. Carleton University.
DeSoto, M. (2018). A content analysis of sugar dating websites [Thesis]. California State
University.
Digest of Education Statistics, 2018 (NCES 2020-009). (2019). U.S. Department of Education,
National Center for Education Statistics.
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d18/ch_3.asp
Drucker, J. (2016). Factors associated with female online sex workers’ intentions to exit from sex
work [Dissertation]. University of California.
Dupont, D. (2019, September 18). BGSU on a mission to serve the public. BG Independent
News. https://bgindependentmedia.org/bgsu-on-a-mission-to-serve-the-public/
Erikson, E. H. (1959). Identity and the life cycle: Selected papers (1st ed., Vol. 1). International
Universities Press.
Farley, M. (2004). “Bad for the body, bad for the heart”: Prostitution harms women even if
legalized or decriminalized. Violence Against Women, 10(10), 1087–1125.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801204268607
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance (Reissued by Stanford Univ. Press in
1962, renewed 1985 by author, [Nachdr.]). Stanford Univ. Press. fxgboy. (2018, August 22). Definition: Race Play [Definition]. Urban Dictionary.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=RacePlay
Gilderman, G. (2017, April 21). The oldest profession evolves-How the web transformed
prostitution. Daily Beast.
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life (Nachdr.). Doubleday. 158
Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford University Press.
Haeger, H., & Deil-Amen, R. (2010). Female college students working in the sex industry: A
hidden population. NASPA Journal About Women in Higher Education, 3(1).
https://doi.org/10.2202/1940-7890.1039
Hammond, E. (2019). The labour of paying for education: An exploration of student sex work in
canada [Dissertation]. Carleton University.
Hickle, K. E. (2017). Resiliency and women exiting sex trade industry work. Journal of Social
Work, 17(3), 302–323. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468017316644692
Hochschild, A. R. (1985). The managed heart: Commercialization of human feeling. University
of California Pr.
Horton, I., & Scott, G. F. (2020, February 24). Students share the sour reality of sugar dating.
Epigram. https://epigram.org.uk/2020/02/24/the-sour-reality-of-sugar-dating/
Immordino, G., & Russo, F. F. (2015). Regulating prostitution: A health risk approach. Journal
of Public Economics, 121, 14–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2014.11.001
Jones, J. (2019). “It’s complex:” Student sex workers constructing their lives in the 21st century.
A modified qualitative content analysis [Dissertation]. Bryn Mawr College.
Kaschel, H. (2017, February 24). Free tuition in Germany not attractive for all foreigners.
Deutsche Welle. https://p.dw.com/p/2YEbU
Kavemann, B. (2007). The Act Regulating the Legal Situation of Prostitutes – implementation,
impact, current developments: Findings of a study on the impact of the German
Prostitution Act (p. 43). Sozialwissenschaftliches FrauenForschungsInstitut an der
Evangelischen Fachhochschule Freiburg. 159
Kennedy, E. (2016). Digital desire: Commercial, moral, and political economies of sex work and
the internet [Dissertation]. University of Kansas.
Kinzel, J., F., Eisenmann, V., & Brancalion, M. (2010). Prostitution bei Studentinnen: Resultate
einer Online-Studie. Sexuologie, 17(3–4), 119–125.
Koken, J., Bimbi, D., S., & Parsons, J., T. (2010). Male and female escourts: A comparative
analysis. In Sex for sale: Prostitution, pornography, and the sex industry (2nd ed.).
Routledge.
Kramer, L. A., & Berg, E. C. (2003). A Survival Analysis of Timing of Entry into Prostitution:
The Differential Impact of Race, Educational Level, and Childhood/Adolescent Risk
Factors. Sociological Inquiry, 73(4), 511–528. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-682X.00069
Krippendorff, K. (2013). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (3rd ed). SAGE.
Lantz, S. (2005). Students working in the Melbourne sex industry: Education, human capital and
the changing patterns of the youth labour market. Journal of Youth Studies, 8(4), 385–
401. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676260500431669
Lee, T. Y., & Shek, D. T. L. (2013). Compensated Dating in Hong Kong: Prevalence,
Psychosocial Correlates, and Relationships with Other Risky Behaviors. Journal of
Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology, 26(3), S42–S48.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpag.2013.03.014
Lee, T. Y., Shek, D. T. L., & Busiol, D. (2016). A longitudinal study of compensated dating and
juvenile prostitution behaviors among adolescents in Hong Kong. Journal of Pediatric
and Adolescent Gynecology, 29(1), S31–S37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpag.2015.10.006 160
Luke, N. (2005). Confronting the “sugar daddy” stereotype: Age and economic asymmetries and
risky sexual behavior in urban Kenya. International Family Planning Perspectives,
31(01), 6–14. https://doi.org/10.1363/3100605
Maher, J., Pickering, S., & Gerard, A. (2012). Privileging Work Not Sex: Flexibility and
Employment in the Sexual Services Industry. The Sociological Review, 60(4), 654–675.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2012.02128.x
Marcia, J. E. (1993). Ego Identity A Handbook for Psychosocial Research.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-8330-7
Masvawure, T. (2010). “I just need to be flashy on campus”: Female students and transactional
sex at a university in Zimbabwe. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 12(8), 857–870.
McMillan, K., Worth, H., & Rawstorne, P. (2018). Usage of the terms prostitution, sex work,
transactional sex, and survival sex: Their utility in HIV prevention research. Archives of
Sexual Behavior, 47(5), 1517–1527. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-017-1140-0
Miller, A. (2011). Sugar dating: A new take on an old issue. Buffalo Journal of Gender, Law &
Social Policy, 20(4), 33–68.
Motyl, J. (2013). Trading sex for college tuition: How sugar daddy “dating” sites may be sugar
coating prostitution. Penn State Law Review, 117(3).
MySugarDaddy: Homepage. (n.d.). MySugarDaddy. Retrieved August 10, 2020, from
https://www.mysugardaddy.de
Nayar, K. I. (2017). Sweetening the deal: Dating for compensation in the digital age. Journal of
Gender Studies, 26(3), 335–346. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2016.1273101 161
Neoliberalism. (n.d.). In Oxford Learner’s Dictionaries. Retrieved July 19, 2020, from
https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/neoliberalism?q=neolibera
lism
Padawer, R. (2009, April 10). Keeping up with being kept. The New York Times Magazine.
https://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/12/magazine/12sugardaddies-
t.html?pagewanted=1&_r=3&sq=arrangement&st=cse&scp=6
Pates, R. (2012). Liberal Laws Juxtaposed with Rigid Control: An Analysis of the Logics of
Governing Sex Work in Germany. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 9(3), 212–222.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-012-0092-3
Peoria Home. (n.d.). Peoria Home. Retrieved October 11, 2020, from https://peoriahome.org
Petter, O. (2013, April 2). Inside the murky world of “sugar dating,” where arrangement sites ask
for how much money you’re looking for and to rate your level of sex drive. Buisness
Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/inside-the-world-of-sugar-dating-2018-4
Pheterson, G. (1993). The Whore Stigma: Female Dishonor and Male Unworthiness. Social Text,
37, 39. https://doi.org/10.2307/466259
Piaget, J., & Gabain, M. (1965). The moral judgment of the child. Free Press.
Rademacher, N., & Snow, J. (2020, May 11). Stuck at home and unemployed, some students
seek out sugar dating for companionship, financial support. University Wire; Carlsbad.
https://search.proquest.com/docview/2400621580?accountid=26417
Reed, L. (2015). Sugar babies, sugar daddies, and the perceptions of sugar dating [Dissertation].
The Chicago School of Professional Psychology. 162
Roberts, R., Jones, A., & Sanders, T. (2013). Students and sex work in the UK: Providers and
purchasers. Sex Education, 13(3), 349–363.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14681811.2012.744304
Roberts, R., Sanders, T., Myers, E., & Smith, D. (2010). Participation in sex work: Students’
views. Sex Education, 10(2), 145–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681811003666507
Rosa, E. M., & Tudge, J. (2013). Urie Bronfenbrenner’s theory of human development: Its
evolution from ecology to bioecology. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 5(4), 243–
258. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12022
Sagar, T., Jones, D., Symons, K., Bowring, J., & Roberts, R. (2015). Student participation in the
sex industry: Higher education responses and staff experiences and perceptions. Journal
of Higher Education Policy and Management, 37(4), 400–412.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2015.1056604
Sagar, T., Jones, D., Symons, K., Tyrie, J., & Roberts, R. (2016). Student involvement in the UK
sex industry: Motivations and experiences: Student involvement in the UK sex industry.
The British Journal of Sociology, 67(4), 697–718. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-
4446.12216
Sanders, T. (2007). Becoming an ex–sex Worker: Making transitions out of a deviant career.
Feminist Criminology, 2(1), 74–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/1557085106294845
Sanders, T., & Campbell, R. (2007). Designing out vulnerability, building in respect: Violence,
safety and sex work policy. The British Journal of Sociology, 58(1), 1–19.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-4446.2007.00136.x 163
Sanders, T., & Hardy, K. (2015). Students selling sex: Marketisation, higher education and
consumption. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 36(5), 747–765.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2013.854596
Sauer, B. (2019). Mobilizing shame and disgust: Abolitionist affective frames in Austrian and
German anti-sex-work movements. Journal of Political Power, 12(3), 318–338.
https://doi.org/10.1080/2158379X.2019.1669262
Scheck, S. (2005). Stages of psychosocial development according to Erik H. Erikson.
Scull, M., T. (2020). “It’s its own thing”: A typology of interpersonal sugar relationship scripts.
Sociological Perspectives, 63(1), 135–158.
https://doi.org/i1.o0r.g1/107.171/077/30173112124114919887755115
Seals, M. (2015). Worker Rights and Health Protection for Prostitutes: A Comparison of The
Netherlands, Germany, and Nevada. Health Care for Women International, 36(7), 784–
796. https://doi.org/10.1080/07399332.2013.850085
SeekingArrangement: Homepage. (n.d.). SeekingArrangement. Retrieved August 10, 2020, from
https://www.seeking.com
SeekingArrangement: How it works. (n.d.). SeekingArrangement.
https://www.seeking.com/how-it-works
Seidman, I. (1991). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education
and the social sciences. Teachers College Press.
Shefer, T., Clowes, L., & Vergnani, T. (2012). Narratives of transactional sex on a university
campus. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 14(4), 435–447.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2012.664660 164
Shively, M., Jalbert, S. K., Kling, R., Rhodes, W., Finn, P., Flygare, C., Tierney, L., & Hunt, D.
(2008). Final Report on the Evaluation of the First Offender Prostitution Program. U.S.
Department of Justice. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/222451.pdf
Shrage, L. (1994). Moral dilemmas of feminism: Prostitution, adultery, and abortion. Routledge.
Sinacore, A. L., Jaghori, B., & Rezazadeh, S. M. (2014). Female University Students Working in
the Sex Trade: A Narrative Analysis Les étudiantes à l’université travaillant dans
l’industrie du sexe: Une analyse narrative. Canadian Journal of Counselling and
Psychotherapy, 48(4), 40–56.
Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative phenomenological analysis:
Theory, method and research. SAGE.
Stoll, A. (2017). Bidding on a “biddie:” Social exchange and online dating [Dissertation]. The
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.
Sugar Baby University: 5th Anniversary. (2020). [Press Release]. SeekingArrangement.
Sugar Baby University: USA. (n.d.). SeekingArrangement. Retrieved October 10, 2020, from
https://www.seeking.com/p/sugar-baby-university-2020/usa
Tomura, M. (2009). A prostitute’s lived experiences of stigma. Journal of Phenomenological
Psychology, 40(1), 51–84. https://doi.org/10.1163/156916209X427981
Vanwesenbeeck, I. (2017). Sex Work Criminalization Is Barking Up the Wrong Tree. Archives
of Sexual Behavior, 46(6), 1631–1640. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-017-1008-3
Voight, A. (2012). Youth Civic Engagement in Urban Middle Schools: Agency and Wellness
Across Ecological Levels. Graduate School of Vanderbilt University.
Weitzer, R. (2009). Sociology of sex work. Annual Review of Sociology, 35(1), 213–234.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-070308-120025 165
Weitzer, R. (Ed.). (2010). Sex for sale: Prostitution, pornography, and the sex industry (2nd ed).
Routledge.
166
APENDIX A. INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
Interview Questions Below is the demographic information I will collect and possible interview questions. I will use a semi-structured method where the main questions form a framework for comparison between participants, but the conversation will focus on the related topics more important to each participant. Thus, follow up questions may be slightly different between participants. The purpose of the questions is to better understand how participants understand the role of culture and relationships on their decisions to continue or quit sugar dating.
Demographic information: 1. How old are you? 2. Do you mind if I ask your gender and sexual orientation? 3. What is your race and ethnicity? 4. What is your education level? a. Are you currently in school? b. Did you graduate, (and if so, when)? c. Do you have student debt? 5. What is your current occupation? 6. Can you tell me a little about your family? a. Are you parents married? Are they both alive? b. What are the ages of your siblings? c. What was your family dynamic growing up and what is it like now? d. Are there any particular memories you could share with me about your family? 7. Do you mind if I ask if you are in a personal relationship or married? a. Can you tell me a little more about that? b. Have you been in a romantic non-sugaring relationship while sugaring?
Interview Body: General Experience: • Can you tell me a little about your experience sugar dating? • How long did you actively sugar date and when did you begin? • How did you learn about sugar dating? • If you’re comfortable, would you describe some of your arrangements? • Have you used a sugar dating website? If so, can you tell me about that experience and why you decided to make an account? • How has sugar dating benefited you or been a determent to your life? • Can you tell me about some of the important relationships in your life and who (if anyone) knows that you sugar date/dated? • Is there anyone you specifically don’t or didn’t tell about your sugar dating? • Do you still sugar date?
Stopping: • Can you tell me a little about your decision to stop? • What did you expect to gain or lose by stopping? • Did you or do you have a plan to stop and if so, can you tell me a little about it? 167
• Did any personal relationships impact your decision to quit sugar dating? If so, can you explain? • Do you envision yourself ever sugar dating again? • Do you see your circumstances or values as different form when you started sugar dating?
Continuing: • Can you tell me a little about your decision to continue? • Can you tell me about your current sugar relationships? • What would you gain or lose by stopping? • Do you have any plan to stop? • Do (and if so, how do) any personal relationships impact your decision to sugar date?
Conclusion: • Is there anything else you would like to talk about in relation to your experiences and thoughts on sugar dating and quitting?
Participant Check-In: • Do you want to talk about how it felt to talk about this with me? • How would you like me to contact you for follow up (in order to give you a chance to give input on your transcript)? • Would you be willing to give my email address, phone number, or my information sheet to anyone who you know who could participate?
168
APENDIX B. INFORMED CONSENT
INFORMED CONSENT FOR: “Student Sugar Dating and the Decision to Desist or Continue upon Graduation”
KEY INFORMATION This study aims to understand how students who identify as sugar babies describe the role that their environment (family, friends, culture) plays in relation to sugar dating and in their decisions to quit or continue upon graduation. Your participation will be completely confidential, and your identity will be protected. You will participate in a single 50 to 60-minute interview over skype or phone regarding your experience sugar dating. You will have an opportunity to read over the possible interview questions and topics before the interview begins. Participation in the study is voluntary and you can withdraw from the study any time.
ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS INTRODUCTION OF THE RESEARCHER: I, Taylor Lenze, am a graduate student at Bowling Green State University and am the principal investigator in this study as part of my master’s thesis. I am working with my advisor, Dr. Hyeyoung Bang. You are being asked to participate in this research about sugar dating and the decision to desist or continue upon graduation because of your experience with sugar dating as a university student.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to explore how graduated university students who sugar date understand and explain their decisions to quit or continue sugar dating after graduating in relation to different influences in their lives including family, friends, and larger culture. This study will work toward filling an important gap in the existing research about student sex workers and the decision to desist or continue after graduation. Knowledge about students’ experiences sugar dating is vital in help universities be better equipped to serve and support this vulnerable and usually invisible student population. Your participation in this study will help achieve this goal.
PROCEDURE: Upon your consent, you will participate in an interview with me, the principal investigator, exploring the experience of sugar dating and your related decisions after graduation. The interview will last no more than 60 minutes based on a set of interview questions given to you before the start of the interview. First, you will answer a short set of demographic questions and then you will have the opportunity to talk about your experience. After the interview’s conclusion you will be contacted by me once via email to give you the opportunity to approve or amend the transcript of the interview and in case of any needed clarification. I do not expect any contact beyond this email.
VOLUNTARY NATURE: Participation in this study is completely voluntary. You are free to withdraw from the study at any time and any recording and transcript from the interview would be destroyed. You may 169
also skip questions at any time without explanation or penalty. Your participation will not impact future relations with the researchers or Bowling Green State University.
CONFIDENTIALITY PROTECTION: Your confidentiality will be protected throughout the entire research process. Only the primary researcher will know your name it will not be connected to your interview transcript. You will have the opportunity to choose a pseudonym. Additionally, any person you mention during the interview will receive a pseudonym in the transcription and all identifying information like names of specific places will be removed. The interview will be audio recorded, and the recording will be kept on a private password-protected computer kept at the researcher’s home and office until transcription (done personally by the principal investigator) and will then be destroyed. No physical copy of your transcript or consent form will be kept. No one else will have access to the recording. All identifying information or specific aspects of your experience which could be identifying will be removed from the transcript and you will have an opportunity to approve it via email. My email is additionally password protected, however it is important to note that email is not completely secure even with a password. No one other than the researcher and her advisors will have any access to the transcripts. Your consent document and interview transcript will be stored electronically in separate non-related files on a password-protected computer and will be destroyed after 5 years to maintain confidentiality.
RISKS: The risk of participation is probably no greater than that experienced in daily life. As I am the only person with your consent form, and no real name nor identifying information will be in your interview transcript, there should be no risk of a breach of confidentiality. The only foreseeable risk is possible emotional discomfort if the topic of sugar dating brings up unwanted emotions, thoughts or memories. I will debrief afterwards if you would like to talk about the experience of being interviewed and how you felt. If our conversation still impacts you strongly, I can provide contact information for counselors in your area but am not responsible for the resulting costs. For your privacy, if you keep a copy of this form, it’s suggested to do so on a private device and delete your download history because some employers use tracking software.
CONTACT INFORMATION: You may contact myself (Taylor Lenze) or my advisor (Dr. Hyeyoung Bang) should you have any questions or concerns about this study.
Taylor Lenze (Principal Investigator) Graduate Student, Educational Foundations, Leadership and Policy and World Languages and Cultures, Bowling Green State University, Email: [email protected], Phone: (248)-949-6218
Dr. Hyeyoung Bang, Ph.D. (Advisor) Associate Professor, Educational Foundations, Leadership and Policy, Bowling Green State University, Email: [email protected], Office Phone: (419) 372-4251
170
You may also contact the Chair of the Bowling Green State University Institutional Review Board, at 419-372-7716 or [email protected], if you have any questions about your rights as a participant in this research.
Thank you for your time and consideration. ______
AGREEMENT I have been informed of the purposes, procedures, risks and benefits of this study. I also have been informed that all information I provide is strictly confidential and will be used for this study’s purpose only. I also have been informed that my identity, information, and responses will be confidential throughout the course of this study. I am free to discontinue participation during data collection at any time. My agreement to participate in this study is signified by my saying “yes” to the question “Do you agree to participate in this study?” when asked at the beginning of the recorded skype/phone interview and my participation.
Thank you for your time.
171
APENDIX C. IRB APPROVAL