I have had this conversation several times now, with friends both male and female. I had it most recently with my automotively well-endowed friend Ferrari Boy, because he has been a little disappointed in the car's performance as a chick magnet.

		Listen In Listen to this Samantha Bennett column in downloadable mp3 audio format.

"We're not after money and material things," I explained to him. "It's just nice if a man has a job, some kind of functioning car you can sit in without ruining your dress and doesn't, past the age of 35 or so, live with his parents and sleep in a bed with Superman sheets."

I stand corrected.

Some women are quite definitely after money and material things, and, as savvy Internet shoppers, they know just where to go to get them: wealthymen.com and sugardaddie.com. These are dating sites where any woman can have her pick of verifiably rich men who will shower her with spa vacations and yachts and jewelry, provided she is a young, gorgeous bikini model.

Well, we're not the only gender with an agenda.

Unlike ordinary dating sites, these register many more women than men. So there is serious competition for these Daddy Warbuckses, and, being alpha males, they can feel free to pick out their fantasy females. Does romance get any more Darwinian?

Choosing a partner for his gentle wisdom or for her kindness and good humor is for losers! Let them go on eHarmony and find some unemployed troll who matches them on 29 dimensions of compatibility. If you are a rich man, you can buy yourself some top-quality choice arm candy. If you are a smokin'-hot young woman, you can pout your way to a fur coat and weekends in the Caribbean.

(I keep thinking there's a word for this. Can't quite put my finger on it.)

Wealthymen.com sounds like a catalog of lifestyle porn for women, where the men must pass a "salary approval process," but the site introduces itself as "the one and only online personals dating site dedicated to those men seeking a higher quality online dating experience." It's for the men. They are the hunters here, not the hunted. They went to the trouble of making a lot of money so they would never have to put up with flabby thighs.

Sugardaddie.com ("As seen on Dr. Phil"? Is that supposed to be reassuring?) is even more up-front about who's in the club: "Millionaires, CEOs, doctors, lawyers, benefactors, models, beauty queens, centerfold models, glamour models, fitness models." Can you guess which are the men and which are the women? I bet you can!

The site is for seekers of "romance, casual dating, relationships of convenience or Sugar Daddy dating." Relationships of convenience? Is there a drive-thru window?

Ladies on the site are referred to as "sugar babes." I'm risking a diabetic coma just writing about this.

(I swear there's a word for it. When a man spends money for the company of an agreeable woman ... no, not just "dating" ...)

A recent Associated Press story about these Web sites cited the experience of a 21-year-old woman who dated an older (no, really?) man from wealthymen.com for three months, during which he paid her rent, car payments and college tuition. Take note, strapped parents of nubile scholars!

Sugardaddie.com's feminine subscribers are overwhelmingly models or actresses, and its male roster is predominantly between the ages of 35 and 50. The difference between a paunchy, balding 48-year-old escorting a hippy, stretch-marked 46-year-old and one escorting a pneumatic 22-year-old swimsuit model is probably about $100K per annum. It's just that simple!

A film producer quoted in the AP article thinks "gold digger" is such an ugly term for women who are discerning enough to have a yen for the finer things (and yet no real interest in achieving them on their own). He puts it this way: "You want to be with a woman that's satisfied with sitting in a trailer park watching soap operas?"

Well, fair enough. On the other hand, do I want to be with a man who has clawed his way to the top by making moronic movies, peddling trans-fats to children, moving his factory to where he can employ kids at $1.50 a week and/or charging the government $1,500 for a plumb bob? Just so I can have lobster and Cristal on a deck overlooking the Riviera?

Give me a minute to pack.

No, no, no, I'm kidding. Anyway, I'm not young or model-y enough. I'm kind of an old-fashioned loser that way: I think a relationship where a man pays a woman to be beautiful and with him is ... darn. (It was on the tip of my tongue. I think it begins with a "P.")

"Professional"? Maybe.