What is a sugar relationship, anyway? Science shows there's no single answer

When people talk about sugar relationships, it's common to picture a fairly fixed model: an older man offers money and gifts to a younger woman in exchange for companionship and, eventually, intimacy. But a study conducted in Sweden shows the reality is far more varied.

Published in the academic journal Social Problems, the study by Lena Gunnarsson and Sofia Strid interviewed sugar babies and sugar daddies and also analyzed responses from users of a sugar dating website. The goal was precisely to understand what people actually do when they say they're in a sugar relationship — without imposing a definition on the phenomenon beforehand.

Not all sugar relationships are the same

One of the study's main findings is that sugar dating takes several different forms.

In some cases, the relationship is essentially sexual and financial. In others, there's a fuller relationship, which may involve sex but also dinners, trips, conversation, outings, and other activities. There are even situations with no sex at all: people simply meet and maintain something closer to a dating relationship or a friendship with material benefits.

In other words, sex is not necessarily part of every sugar relationship. The study found everything from predominantly financial arrangements to experiences with strong personal involvement.

So what's actually part of the exchange?

Money comes up frequently, but there are other forms of support too.

Among participants, reported benefits included payments, allowances, gifts, trips, clothes, and date expenses. Some relationships also involved professional help, guidance, support with practical matters, and even mentorship.

In the survey, 83% of sugar babies mentioned money among the benefits received. Gifts came up for 74%. But other aspects stood out too: 44% mentioned having someone to talk to, and 46% mentioned validation or increased confidence. Among daddies, adventure, conversation, and intimacy also ranked among the top benefits.

This helps explain why reducing a sugar relationship to a simple exchange of money can leave out an important part of many participants' experience.

Money isn't necessarily the only motivation

The research also found important differences in sugar babies' motivations.

Some participated mainly for the material benefits. For others, the relationship was also enjoyable in itself. Companionship, chemistry, intimacy, fun, and shared experiences could hold value independent of the money.

In other words, some people approach sugar dating in a fairly instrumental way, while others genuinely enjoy the relationship they build. And the two can coexist: someone can value both the financial benefit and their partner's company.

So is it a relationship or a business arrangement?

This might be the most interesting question the study raises.

A sugar relationship can occupy a middle ground between the two. There's an economic dimension that isn't usually present in traditional dating, but feelings, attraction, intimacy, and a genuine connection can also be present.

That's why the researchers conclude that it isn't possible to place every sugar relationship into a single category. Some come very close to commercial and sexual transactions, while others are much closer to affectionate relationships that also happen to have a financial dimension.

The study also shows that this diversity matters for understanding the controversies surrounding sugar dating. Some participants see their experiences as clearly different from prostitution, while others use the same sites for essentially sexual encounters.

For anyone entering the sugar world, the main takeaway may be simple: there's no single model for a sugar relationship. What matters is understanding what each person is looking for, what their expectations are, and how the arrangement between the two of you actually works.

Source

Lena Gunnarsson and Sofia Strid, "Varieties of Sugar Dating in Sweden: Content, Compensation, Motivations", Social Problems, vol. 70, no. 4, 2023, pp. 1044–1062. DOI: 10.1093/socpro/spab063.