Our society values youth and looks the most of any characteristic of women. After a certain age a woman’s so-called “value” goes down to nothing regardless of whether she has accumulated money or power. So .001% of the female population will look like models and can extract favors from rich men. Society values money and power the most of any characteristic of men so .001% of men will be obscenely rich and can buy other people. (My percentages are totally made up, no idea the true ones.)
This is not feminism. This is the world's oldest transaction. Since women from earliest times in most human gatherings were not able to accumulate wealth and resources on their own they traded sexual access to men for protection and food. This is the most primitive setup a species can have. It shows that while we think we have transcended biology we are still operating on the most primitive level under all of our technological trappings.
I have never thought it empowering to trade my youth and looks (when I still have/had them) for a piece of someone else's pie. I want my own power, and by power I mean freedom to live life on my own terms. I want my own money. Only powerless people have to use manipulation to get a share of power from the people with the actual power. I do not consider this a privilege. Or if it is, it is only one given to the most good-looking people on earth and that is not exclusive to women.
Young, good-looking men can do all of the same things - if they sell themselves to other men. You have to remember that there is 1 constant, namely that the buyers in this equation are men. The sellers can be either male or female. Female biology and Western culture have not produced nearly as many self-made rich women as men with the means to purchase the company of younger, better looking people. Biology also does not drive women to seek out younger, better looking companions most of the time, even when the women have means. There are exceptions to this on both sides, but the vast majority of consumers/buyers of young companionship are going to be male.
So if you are young and in the top .1% of men for looks you can get a Sugar Daddy, too. There are numerous apps, websites, and clubs where rich gay men go looking for toyboys.
If you think this is not the same thing because the female Sugar Babies are straight and get to be in straight “relationships” whereas you are not gay and would have to be in a gay relationship, you're not really getting it. For a many (I believe most) women, having to be with a man sexually whom she does not find attractive or care about is disturbing and repugnant. Sugar Babies aren't spending time with these men because they are attracted to them or are in love with them or desire sex with them. It's just about money. So it's the same thing if you want to make money by being with a man you're not attracted to (if you are straight.)
For me, there is no amount of money that would make it bearable to have sex with someone who physically repulses me. I am lucky that I have other options in life.
Again, if sexual power was real power then we would already have had a string of female presidents, and half the government and Fortune 1000 CEOs would be female. The 100 richest people on earth would be half female. Sexuality is not enough to get that kind of power. Wheedling favors from a more powerful person is derivative and secondary.