This is dumb, because there’s no alternative term that captures this power\money dynamic. The term exists because patriarchal systems exist: companion or lover are deeply misleading about the nature of these relationships
this Is, in fact, exactly the kind of euphemism that men who keep mistresses like to use to delude themselves or others about the fundamental underpinning of the relationship!
billionaire with a 19 year old model at his side: this is my companion.
“Don’t use mistress to describe any woman having sex with a married man: only use it when there’s a clear and established financial relationship and apply the same sensibilities as you would to other sex work” is reasonable guidance: this is actively counterproductive
While I’m irritated about this, the misuse of “archaic” here is also bad. “Archaic” words are ones that have dropped out of common usage, not ones you dislike for ideological reasons.
