"Sugar Daddy Confession" by Milo Yiannopoulos (Bloomberg News) - $10,000 a night?

[+ newguy]

Forgive me if this belongs in the "Politics" section. If so, it should be

moved over.

 

Ever see the f*ckable conservative blogger, Milo Yiannopoulos. He can be quite

fetching when his hair is dyed blonde.

 

His sugar daddy confession to "Bloomberg News" astonished me

more for his price: $10,000 a night?

 

Details below.

 

http://americablog.com/2016/09/bloomberg-breitbart-writer-milo-makes-money-gay-sugar-daddies.html

 

PS here's Milo in action (with the blonde hair)

 

[+ quoththeraven]

Oh FFS. First of all, the way that quote from Bloomberg News is phrased makes it look as though the money Yiannopoulos received from his hookups was money he kept rather than money used to fund staff or whatever.

 

Second, it sounds more like a gift or unsolicited tip, at least the first time around. Rich guy picks him up, they fuck, rich guy shows his appreciation. It would be like rich guy buying him a Rolex he admired. It would only be prostitution if they discussed and agreed on a price up front. Prostitution involves the exchange of sex for money. I think that impliedly requires some certainty about the amount of money, not (for example) an avowal of unspecified generosity.

 

Second time around, I can see arguing it's still not prostitution but it's a closer question that depends in part on what kind of discussion they have.

 

Third, without some prediscussion and a definite price, the first $10,000 is a gift, not income. What the other $10,000 represents is subject to the same questions as raised above. If it's now prostitution, then yes, it's income.

 

If Yiannopoulis spent the money in ways that aren't easily traced, good luck nailing him for tax evasion or even for a tax bill.

 

The outlandish amount itself tends to lead me in the direction of a gift/tip for an enjoyable experience. If the rich guy thought he was hiring an escort rather than rewarding a pick up, I would expect him not to pay an amateur so far above market.

 

I think Yiannoupolis is a scumbag, but I would not conclude from this that he is also a sex worker.

[jimboivyo]

guy looks frumpy to me. with all that sugar babe money, couldn't he have found a better suit to wear?

[+ newguy]

Oh FFS. First of all, the way that quote from Bloomberg News is phrased makes it look as though the money Yiannopoulos received from his hookups was money he kept rather than money used to fund staff or whatever.

 

Second, it sounds more like a gift or unsolicited tip, at least the first time around. Rich guy picks him up, they fuck, rich guy shows his appreciation. It would be like rich guy buying him a Rolex he admired. It would only be prostitution if they discussed and agreed on a price up front. Prostitution involves the exchange of sex for money. I think that impliedly requires some certainty about the amount of money, not (for example) an avowal of unspecified generosity.

 

Second time around, I can see arguing it's still not prostitution but it's a closer question that depends in part on what kind of discussion they have.

 

Third, without some prediscussion and a definite price, the first $10,000 is a gift, not income. What the other $10,000 represents is subject to the same questions as raised above. If it's now prostitution, then yes, it's income.

 

If Yiannopoulis spent the money in ways that aren't easily traced, good luck nailing him for tax evasion or even for a tax bill.

 

The outlandish amount itself tends to lead me in the direction of a gift/tip for an enjoyable experience. If the rich guy thought he was hiring an escort rather than rewarding a pick up, I would expect him not to pay an amateur so far above market.

 

I think Yiannoupolis is a scumbag, but I would not conclude from this that he is also a sex worker.

---------------------------

You make a lot of sense. But...Personally (my own humble opinion), one can have a "big tent" theory of sex work: if there is a hint of expectation of monetary reward, even if the end-use of the money is kept vague, the f*ckee is commodifying his/her body. That is, he/she is making use of the physical body as a "a raw material [akin to a] primary agricultural product that can be bought and sold, such as copper or coffee..." That's good enough for most people as the definition of sex work. An accountant can classify the $10,000 as either a gift, a reward, payment-for-services, a loan, an investment, a political contribution. It doesn't matter. That's just the matter of an accounting code. The person being f*cked or getting his dick s*cked may not even do that much "work." He can just be absolutely passive. He's still a sex "worker."

[+ sync]

I understand that these days commitment is on a sliding scale, but I did notice in the video he is wearing what appears to be a wedding band.

[+ quoththeraven]

---------------------------

You make a lot of sense. But...Personally (my own humble opinion), one can have a "big tent" theory of sex work: if there is a hint of expectation of monetary reward, even if the end-use of the money is kept vague, the f*ckee is commodifying his/her body. That is, he/she is making use of the physical body as a "a raw material [akin to a] primary agricultural product that can be bought and sold, such as copper or coffee..." That's good enough for most people as the definition of sex work. An accountant can classify the $10,000 as either a gift, a reward, payment-for-services, a loan, an investment, a political contribution. It doesn't matter. That's just the matter of an accounting code. The person being f*cked or getting his dick s*cked may not even do that much "work." He can just be absolutely passive. He's still a sex "worker."

 

The issue is whether he violated the law. "The prosecutor must show that the defendant had a specific intent to engage in prostitution -- specifically, the defendant must have intended to participate in a lewd act in exchange for compensation. The defendant and the other participant must have formed an agreement to carry out the intent to engage in prostitution."

 

Source: http://statelaws.findlaw.com/california-law/california-prostitution-laws.html

 

Based on that, the first encounter almost certainly didn't constitute prostitution. (Monetary reward is not something normally discussed before a casual hookup.) If there was no discussion of money the second time either, I doubt that meets the criteria either.

 

Of course the only people who know could lie. And this is never going to trial anyway. It's much easier to catch people in the act or set up stings.

 

Nevertheless, the linked article (not the Bloomberg article it riffs off of) is bullshit, shoddy journalism.

[+ RyanDean]

Regarding Yionnopoulus' story, I might believe the compensated pickup story. Maaaybe. But that 10k figure? Nah.

 

Seems like -- to crib from a recent feature on the guy -- to be yet another "choreographed performance by a career sociopath who will claim any cause to further his legend."

[+ pitman]

Maybe Milo just made the whole thing up, and he, like his candidate, is a pathological liar.

[+ quoththeraven]

Maybe Milo just made the whole thing up, and he, like his candidate, is a pathological liar.

 

Possible. But it seems like a stupid story to make up.

[+ ArVaGuy]

In my view, Milo is a performance artist. You can't take what he says at full face value. He is excellent at lampooning liberal hypocrites, particularly on our college campuses. His antics have revealed the weakness and outright stupidity of PC culture.

 

He may claim to have been paid a ton of money by a sugar daddy which may or may not be true. It's just as likely he made the whole story up just to mess with the reporter and see it in print. The outrageousness further advances his persona and enhances his brand.

 

He's playing a joke on everyone and getting away with it. That he upsets Liberals by exposing their inner bigotry is just icing on the cake. I also think he could turn on a dime and do the same to conservatives if PC culture were not so pervasive and deserving of ridicule.

[+ newguy]

In my view, Milo is a performance artist. You can't take what he says at full face value. He is excellent at lampooning liberal hypocrites, particularly on our college campuses. His antics have revealed the weakness and outright stupidity of PC culture.

 

He may claim to have been paid a ton of money by a sugar daddy which may or may not be true. It's just as likely he made the whole story up just to mess with the reporter and see it in print. The outrageousness further advances his persona and enhances his brand.

 

He's playing a joke on everyone and getting away with it. That he upsets Liberals by exposing their inner bigotry is just icing on the cake. I also think he could turn on a dime and do the same to conservatives if PC culture were not so pervasive and deserving of ridicule.

This sounds more true to the story. Yes, Milo could well have bragged that he got $25,000 a night.

He just wants to be noticed and reported on.

 

NG

[+ ArVaGuy]

This sounds more true to the story. Yes, Milo could well have bragged that he got $25,000 a night.

He just wants to be noticed and reported on.

 

NG

 

Here's a link that I think proves my point that Milo is a performance artist. He gave a speech at LSU Baton Rouge in drag. His drag name is Ivanna Wall and he's decked out in a huge blonde wig and evening gown.

 

http://www.breitbart.com/milo/2016/09/21/full-photos-milo-appears-louisiana-state-drag-queen-ivana-wall/

 

Despite the antics and the narcissism, I kind of like the way he upsets so many progressives on campus. It's amusing to see them get worked up over this showman.