By Bernie Yeo
AMIDST the brouhaha surrounding the controversial Sugarbook application and the recent decision by Malaysia’s internet regulator to block access to the website, the fact that it is unfair to categorise sugar babies based on which university they attend is something that seemed to have slipped most people’s minds.
Rather than categorising them in such a manner, shouldn’t age and background be fairer factors used to analyse how and why these students end up as sugar babies in the first place?
After all, the pursuit of academia is a matter that should not be taken lightly, and it is simply illogical to link tertiary institution students to such a mutually-beneficial arrangement.
In other words, how are sugar babies and that they go to school even related in the first place?
Sugarbook, by publishing such a list, is hardly doing anybody any justice. Let’s apply logic here for a minute.
Why would any student provide accurate personal details of themselves when applying to become a sugar baby, especially their names and where they go to school?
As many people use pseudonyms these days, who is to say that the personal details provided to Sugarbook are legit and not faked?
More importantly, if their real personal details were exposed, wouldn’t this be detrimental to their current status, reputation as well as their academic pursuit?
Furthermore, sexual arrangements between consenting adults are matters to be kept strictly away from academia, regardless if the sugar babies are nurses, accountants or lawyers.
Do not lose sight of the main point, which is their financial needs, not their current jobs or status.
Rather than just targeting the sugar babies, shouldn’t sugar daddies be equally, if not more, exposed in this controversy?
After all, they are the ‘givers’, and they were the ones who created the demand for sugar babies in the first place. – Feb 17, 2021
