Ok, maybe I'm reading this wrong, but from what I understand... your ex-boyfriend and you got back together, you went to a charity bachelorette event where your boyfriend was one of the dates, so you paid as much money as you could hoping to get a date with him, instead you won a date with another guy, now you're worried your boyfriend will be upset; correct? If this is the case, both your boyfriend and yourself had to know that you may not actually get a winning date with your boyfriend, it was for charity though, so it doesn't really matter. You have two options, remind your boyfriend that it was for charity and you're not interested in this guy and happy you two are back together (if you actually have to explain this to your boyfriend then that's sad); or tell the guy you won the date with that a date isn't necessary as the whole point was money for charity (this is rude, but technically could be done because I'm sure the guy was only doing this for charity and doesn't actually want to date some random woman who already has a boyfriend). One other scenario is that you were the date being auctioned and your boyfriend didn't get the winning date with you and some other guy did (after re-reading I think that this scenario is more likely). If that's the case, everything I said above still applies.

I believe it was the other way around, OP was the one being bid on, and another guy paid more than her bf did so the other guy won her date. But still, it shouldn't be an issue, and if it is, then maybe he should stay an ex...

Right, I realized that at the end, and said it would most likely be that scenario. Either way, it shouldn't be a problem.

What's that old lyric? Money can't buy me love.

That is a lyric, indeed. Two words: Melania Trump.

You do realize that this is for charity right? Just because he didn't have enough money doesn't mean that he doesn't value OP

The "dates" that are auctioned off aren't necessarily real dates. If the purchased person had to have sex with their buyer, it'd be prostitution.

I'd say OP's boyfriend was pissed that she "went out with someone else" and broke up with her before she reminded him it's a fake date for charity.

Since when does a "real date" have to include sex???

I do, otherwise it's a failure.

Actually no. Dates are called dates for a reason. There is no such thing as a "platonic" date and if there was, it would be an unfair insult. If you ask me, this just sounds like some chick complaining that her boyfriend didn't spend enough money on her. in which case YDI because not all men can afford to express love in an amount of money. But hey that us my opinion and this is bound to get downvoted. Oh well.

Actually dates CAN be platonic. The very definition of date is a social OR romantic appointment. I often say I'm going on a date with my mom/dad/sister/friends/etc... My friend has gone on "dates" with two separate guys the same week, they both knew and were ok because they understood the dates were platonic. I get that not everyone sees "dates" that way (many view them as exclusively romantic like you), and there are "romantic" dates too. But in a charity auction, people are aware the date doesn't automatically mean they'll enter a serious relationship, make out, or have sex. They can hope for more (as this guy did), but in these situations nothing but platonic actions are guaranteed.

That being said, in this case I can understand OP (and her bf's) discomfort because she's aware the guy who won likes her and was hoping for more. My point was just that dates can be platonic, and charity events often do not guarantee anything more than a platonic date.

Prostitution? That's a bit harsh, they are merely two people sharing their time for charity. Very noble.