Dammit, you and Shack are killing me!!! LOL I haven't had a SB since pre-Covid!!Reporting live: she is a solid 9, actress and prefers anal for some child trauma reason. I’m in heaven.
Dammit, you and Shack are killing me!!! LOL I haven't had a SB since pre-Covid!!Reporting live: she is a solid 9, actress and prefers anal for some child trauma reason. I’m in heaven.
And then my next date with another girl was a disaster. We agreed on an allowance in advance and only got a BBBJ and she expected a tip. When I objected she went off on me for about 20 minutes. She had real attitude.Dammit, you and Shack are killing me!!! LOL I haven't had a SB since pre-Covid!!
was she really young? A woman over 23 should not do thatAnd then my next date with another girl was a disaster. We agreed on an allowance in advance and only got a BBBJ and she expected a tip. When I objected she went off on me for about 20 minutes. She had real attitude.
Stick with sp's, save your money (and time).Finally decided to give up on SB sites. So much wasted time and finally thought I had one girl
until she just randomly stopped texting me for no reason at all. SP's only from now on.
She was 23. Island girl.was she really young? A woman over 23 should not do that
if I suspect something like this may happen I'd just ask at the meet and greet whether she has any hard "No"s in bed. I once had a chick confessing that she doesn't orgasm (and there was something else like no digits or something) and I terminated the date. Boy was she mad.
I’m also getting more messages than usual. Maybe life in Toronto is indeed getting more expensive.I've been talking to a 21 y.o. blonde this aft. We last spoke very briefly in December and she messaged me today out of the blue. Pretty and nice body. She sounds nice. I think we're close to setting up a date.
And Valentine's day is approaching ....I’m also getting more messages than usual. Maybe life in Toronto is indeed getting more expensive.
is "seeking" the site that used to be "seeking arrangement" or is it just seeking.com? (Also their site says "successful and attractive". I'm not sure if I qualify)I've had the best success with Seeking, but of course YMMV. (Personally I think Secret benefits is a waste of your money but thats my experience) All the sites cost $$ for the guys but at least seeking is a flat monthly price.
There is no verification needed for the SD unless you want to do it. I suppose girls would be more inclined to reply to guys with a verification but I don't know this for sure, and I can't see other guys profiles so I can't say what % of guys take that step. Personally I'm not giving the site any personal info for the privacy reasons you've suggested.
Re information given to the SB. I use an alias that I created several years ago in a moment of creativity/paranoia, and I use it on the Sugar sites as well as any messaging apps like Snapchat. You're free to share as much as you want with the girl once you're comfortable but honestly I've never had a girl even ask for my last name, let alone ask if the first name I use is my real one (which it isn't) I never let her see my wallet or ID (leave it in the car, and just bring cash to the meet and greet) Oddly the young women these days seem very unconcerned with their privacy, and I've learned way more about them through simple conversation than I'd ever give up about myself.
I've never found a Sugar Dating forum, but I'd be happy to hear if anyone knows of one.
As far as bad experiences, they do happen, and not every initial contact works out. The meet and greet cup of coffee or drink really helps with weeding out possible bad situations. Rule number one is think with the big head and walk away if you get the wrong vibe, no matter how hot she is.
I did see one girl a few times and finally ended it because she showed up to two consecutive dates hung over. We met on her day off and she kept hanging out with friends at the bars night before. She didn't get that she was getting more from me for a couple of hours in bed than she did from her shitty job, so showing up in peak condition to have fun really was in her best interest. So be it, lesson learned.
Yes that the one, either should get you to the right website.is "seeking" the site that used to be "seeking arrangement" or is it just seeking.com? (Also their site says "successful and attractive". I'm not sure if I qualify)
Lol the guy that coughs up the most dough is the most attractiveYes that the one, either should get you to the right website.
Successful and Attractive? If you’ve got enough spare cash to be playing in the world of escorts and SB’s you’re successful enough all right.. Attractive? its the ladies who need to be attractive, you just need to be a gentleman. As long as you’re not an asshole its all good.
Exactly, if you’ve got enough to be in the game you’re attractive enoughLol the guy that coughs up the most dough is the most attractive
Smart enough to become a lawyer but too dumb dealing with real life experiences. He got what he deserved.https://www.reddit.com/r/toronto/comments/10xylfj
Toronto lawyer Azmat Ramal-Shah claimed in a $226 million lawsuit that he was defrauded by his sugar baby and her Aurora parents, who let him spend $20,000 on the University of Ottawa student while she professed her love but told him all kinds of lies not to meet him in person, including an aunt’s funeral, a broken leg and a sudden cancer diagnosis.
According to his almost 150-page claim, the heartsick would-be lover alleged Kirsten Jones, now 25, and her parents, Michael and Colleen Jones, committed “fraud, defamation, interference with his economic interests and intentional infliction of emotional distress,” and despite his master’s degrees from prestigious Duke School of Law and Ivey School of Business, the saga has left him unable to get an appropriate high-paying job.
An Ontario judge wasn’t too sympathetic.
when God decides to punish a man, God takes man's sanity away lolhttps://www.reddit.com/r/toronto/comments/10xylfj
Toronto lawyer Azmat Ramal-Shah claimed in a $226 million lawsuit that he was defrauded by his sugar baby and her Aurora parents, who let him spend $20,000 on the University of Ottawa student while she professed her love but told him all kinds of lies not to meet him in person, including an aunt’s funeral, a broken leg and a sudden cancer diagnosis.
According to his almost 150-page claim, the heartsick would-be lover alleged Kirsten Jones, now 25, and her parents, Michael and Colleen Jones, committed “fraud, defamation, interference with his economic interests and intentional infliction of emotional distress,” and despite his master’s degrees from prestigious Duke School of Law and Ivey School of Business, the saga has left him unable to get an appropriate high-paying job.
An Ontario judge wasn’t too sympathetic.
20 grand without meeting the girl sounds about as stupid as this could possible get, and then you read this and realize that being stupid is the least of this guys many flaws. I don’t think the girl has anything to do with his inability to get a better job, although he does sound perfect for the legal team of a certain ex-POTUSwhen God decides to punish a man, God takes man's sanity away lol
1. Between November 2018 and September 2020, while representing himself in a civil dispute with AB, the Respondent:
a) communicated and attempted to negotiate directly with AB, despite repeated requests from her counsel, CD, to cease any and all communications with AB, contrary to rule 7.2-6 of the Rules of Professional Conduct (“the Rules”);
b) communicated with AB in a manner that was uncivil, offensive, discourteous, not in good faith, and otherwise inconsistent with the proper tone of professional communication, including using foul language and making unfounded scandalous allegations, contrary to rules 7.2-1 and 7.2-4 of the Rules;
c) communicated with CD in a manner that was uncivil, offensive, discourteous, not in good faith, and otherwise inconsistent with the proper tone of professional communication, including making uninformed criticism of the competence of CD and unfounded allegations of unethical conduct against CD, contrary to rules 7.2-1 and 7.2-4 of the Rules; and
d) threatened to initiate or pursue criminal charges against AB, should their dispute not settle to his satisfaction, contrary to rule 3.2-5(a) of the Rules.
![]()
Ramal-Shah, 21H-054 NOA - Law Society Tribunal
lawsocietytribunal.ca
Yes, that guy was crazy.20 grand without meeting the girl sounds about as stupid as this could possible get, and then you read this and realize that being stupid is the least of this guys many flaws. I don’t think the girl has anything to do with his inability to get a better job, although he does sound perfect for the legal team of a certain ex-POTUS![]()






