In Kenya, “sugar” relationships have become both more common and more visible

Yes, it happened. Two girls wanted to transition to a normal relationship after several months. One of them was this extremely smart girl I mentioned. But I just couldn't do it because of how we met. I did think about 3 girls (those two included) that I'd have no reason not to date them if we met in a different way.

1-2 at a time. When I'm single, I want to have some time for normal dating as well. They lasted from one month (or less if something didn't go well) to 8 months. It's a nice thing to be able to go out on normal dates while knowing that you can have sex with a girl just as good or better looking than the date and you're not cheating.

Only cash. I don't see why I would want to spend my time going to stores with them or shopping online. I know it's a thing - I was asked to but I declined. On the other hand, I don't mind dinners or even traveling together if I want a companion. But I don't understand guys who do the shopping thing - maybe they are really in love and that's the way for them to impress the girl? But to me, it's not a "real" relationship.

For rich women, the ability to enter into these "sponsor relationships" is empowering, enabling them to do more. And as long as they can just end it on short notice, certainly empowering.

For poor women, who would not be able to eat without a sponsor relationship or outright prostitution, the freedom is a prison, effectively convicting them to lifelong sex work.

This would also work in reverse. Zero tolerance for prostitution is liberating for the poor, oppressive for the rich. Not just for women even, if you consider for a little bit what the effect on men is, it is even liberating for men.

For rich men, of course the ability to just buy women without needing to hide anything is liberating. Even for men who just want to have sex without condoms (often very strongly legislated against in outright sex work, and enforced by the women, for health reasons) it is liberating.

The same is true for many other issues that current society can't seem to make it's mind up over. For, example, for many young girls, the "freedom to wear the islamic face veil" is not freedom at all, because their parents have a very strong preference (and feel justified in using violence to get this particular issue settled). And of course that leads to further oppression.

But for women who are already in a position of sufficient power to just do what they want, whatever comes into their mind, a prohibition on face veils would be limiting.

However, in both examples it is only liberty at the expense of others that is achieved. Usually liberty for the powerful, and usually men at that, at the expense of poorer people, mostly women.

But we should allow this ... because Beyonce used it to achieve great status. And that it failed 99.99% of those who tried it ? Oh well ...

And there is the small issue that there are many more women for whom outlawing prostitution is liberating, where even just outlawing or socially punishing sponsorship relationships would at least provide safe sex and there are many more girls for whom a prohibition on face veils would be liberating, where it would provide a way out of a bad family position, an initial concession to "family oppression/values" that their parents would be forced to make. Because there are simply much more poor ...