• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Student auctions off virginity for offers of more than £2.5 million

Dynamic said:
But I clearly said I have noticed those who have no problem with it have no self respect. But that doesn't mean you don't. Or that other people don't. Just a majority really. There's always room for exceptions.
Click to expand...


Then that is your opinion, i don't think those who don't like this have somehow more self respect than those who do support it.
I do not see the issue with this at all. I am very curious to what the attitude would have been if this story was a woman paying and the man selling.
 
Laila said:
Then that is your opinion, i don't think those who don't like this have somehow more self respect than those who do support it.
I do not see the issue with this at all. I am very curious to what the attitude would have been if this story was a woman paying and the man selling.
Click to expand...

I suspect the attitude would still be that the woman had no "self respect".
 
Laila said:
Then that is your opinion, i don't think those who don't like this have somehow more self respect than those who do support it.
I do not see the issue with this at all. I am very curious to what the attitude would have been if this story was a woman paying and the man selling.
Click to expand...

Dear god. You have acknowledged I'm allowed an opinion, and then run to the moon with it. I'm female. So my attitude would be the same. I don't tend to discriminate. I'm all for gay marriage too, but if it were a gay man or woman selling themselves I'd still have the same attitude. And yes it is my opinion. And I don't care that yours is different. I haven't told anyone they're wrong for the way they think.
 
1069 said:
I suspect the attitude would still be that the woman had no "self respect".
Click to expand...

I agree, i think that would have been the attitude. The woman is still the 'slut'

Hey, if woman are comfortable with their sexuality and their bodies. Go do what you want with it.
 
Dynamic said:
I'm female. So my attitude would be the same. I don't tend to discriminate.
Click to expand...

Wth?
I stated i was CURIOUS.
I did not say YOUR attitude would have changed :doh
 
1069 said:
I suspect the attitude would still be that the woman had no "self respect".
Click to expand...

Aren't you catty today. just like everyday

It's sad, that you just puked out this long bruha about people having different opinions...yet you, yourself, can't even live up to your words. Good game.
 
Laila said:
Wth?
I stated i was CURIOUS.
I did not say YOUR attitude would have changed :doh
Click to expand...

I wasn't allowed to respond with how mine would have been? You took my posting about you. When it wasn't. Why are you so upset if someone else does the same? Especially when your curiosity arose while you were responding to me.
 
The whore part I understand--because of what the definition is. But "slut" cannot apply to a virgin.

But I do wonder, if she has to work for the bunny ranch for this to be legal, then I'm sure she'd have to **** more than just one person unless she's smart enough to quit as soon as the deed is done. If she wasn't, then she'd be a slut.
 
1069 said:
A picture of when I was young and looked a little like her?
I'm naked in it!! :2razz:

I'll see if I can find it.

*edit* I can't find it on my computer; I have it as a polaroid in my closet somewhere, but I don't have a scanner. Maybe tomorrow, if I feel up to it, I'll take a photo of the polaroid with my digital camera, and post that.
You'd probably think I looked like a whore, a monster, and the second-runner-up for the "worst person in the world" award, though, because- haha- I basically was. You'd probably say that you hoped I would get a disease, be harshly punished, and fall into a pit to hell and die.

I know your type.
Click to expand...

Come on... Geez.. Part of the reason she is a monster is because she sold her body and is proud of it, she also lied about being a virgin to do it.
She didnt look that nice either...

And you, you are from Austin, come on, I like those people from Austin.
 
Kali said:
Dirty? I bet you would bang a woman via anal! :rofl

Maybe we should start a thread downstairs about this:mrgreen:
Click to expand...

No, I wouldn't.. I don't do anal, never will.. Why in the world would I when vagina exist?
 
Kali said:
Huh? Moral decay? A few posts back you were the one talking about how sex with non virgins is much better due to they know what they are doing much more than a virgin. You seem to be a hypocrite:(
Click to expand...

Whats wrong with that? Its not wrong to have sex.... Certainly not wrong to like experienced women rather than virgins.
 
1069 said:
Well, it was hard to get the gist of what he was saying, because he kept mumbling, blushing, and beating around the bush- no pun intended- but he seems to be laboring under the delusion that the more times a woman has sex, the looser her pooz gets. I guess married women who routinely have sex are positively knackered, in his scenario, while women who have had kids... well, you might as well just drag them out behind the barn and shoot them.
He doesn't seem to understand that poozies are stretchy, and dicks aren't really all that big.
He seems to believe that a vajay only has a certain number of uses in it, like a Bic lighter or a disposable razor, and after it's been used umpteen times it's finished and needs to be thrown away and replaced.
Which makes about as much sense as if one of us said, "Oh, that guy looks like a scumbag. He looks like he's had sex more times than most guys twice his age. I'll bet his dick's just all used up. It probably looks like a little shrivelled-up dog turd, and his nuts probably look like a couple of raisins. That's what happens to men when they whore around indiscriminately, you know. They get all ****ed-out, and pretty soon their business dries up and falls off."

I mean, this seems to be more or less the same mentality as the idea that one might actually be able to tell, by looking at a woman, by the condition of her vagina or by some other physical sign, how many men she has slept with.
:roll:
Click to expand...

Thats just a completely untrue distortion of what I said..
 
Maximus Zeebra said:
1. She lied about being a virgin
2. To sell her body
3. She is proud of it
4. She is ugly
Click to expand...

1. This is a groundless assumption. unless you've slept with her yourself, you have no idea whether or not she's a virgin.

2. We've pretty much established that "selling one's body' is a logical impossibility, unless one is selling it to a med school as a research cadaver, and even then they can't collect it until you're already dead.

3. I would be, too. 3 million is an outlandish sum, possibly the highest ever paid for a single sex act.

4. We've only seen two still photos, which appear to be of two entirely different people- one mildly unattractive, one mildly attractive.
They can't both represent her actual appearance, since they don't look alike at all. We really have no idea what she looks like.
 
Maximus Zeebra said:
1. She lied about being a virgin
2. To sell her body
3. She is proud of it
4. She is ugly
Click to expand...

1. Prove it.
2. Alarmist rhetoric
3. So what? It's her choice, not yours.
4. That's a matter of opinion.
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
You're right, they don't. That's what laws are for.

The bolded portion of this statement is your subjective moral opinion, which you are attempting to impose upon others by restricting them from using lawful means to discourage undesired behavior. I do not disapprove of this action on your part, save that I disagree with the specific moral standards that you are attempting to impose-- that is, the standard that as long as no third party can come forth and demonstrate injury, no third party may interfere in the conduct of two consenting adults.
Click to expand...

You have no right to speak of "imposing", what you want is to impose your morals on another person with laws hidden behind the mask of "society". I want people to be free to make their own decisions. You still have the right to express your opinion, but when you impose laws based on that opinion, you are taking away another person's right. That is the difference. Your need to impose your beliefs on other people by force or punishment removes another person's freedom. Your freedom to have your opinion is intact, letting a person sell their body does not take away your freedom of opinion.

Korimyr the Rat said:
I believe that society is more than the sum of its parts, more than the mass of individuals which comprise it. And I believe how those individuals behave, whether they are consenting adults or not, influences the health, strength, and fortunes of their families and communities, and those of the larger society that they belong to.
Click to expand...

Society can not exist without individuals, but individuals exist without society. Therefore the individual holds more weight. People are individuals long before society gets its grip on them, and they are individuals throughout their life whether society exists or not.

Korimyr the Rat said:
And I believe that prostitution is a foul business that degrades all participants-- customers and practitioners alike-- destroys families, and spreads disease. I have every right to seek the abolition of such a practice.

As has already been noted, that is also how society becomes degenerate.
Click to expand...

If the girl in question is participating in the act of prostitution, then she obviously does not feel "degraded". Exactly what is "degrading" about it? The only thing degrading about it is that people are conditioned to believe it is so. It is infused into the minds and becomes a mainstay without any justification. It exists simply because people were told to believe it.

What about prostitutes who do not do business with married men? What about prostitutes who do not have disease? What is your reasoning for being against them? There is no exclusive connection between prostitution and this things.

What about people with disease who are not prostitutes having sex? What about people who have sex with married people who are not prostitutes?

Are you actually against the act of prostitution, or disease and infidelity?

I think you would be very interested in the writings of Lord Patrick Devlin, especially "Morals and the Criminal Law." He was a brilliant man who argued for much of the same thing you do here. You may have already read it, but here it is just in case:

Morals and the Criminal Law

Devlin and another man, named H. L. A. Hart, had some extensive debates on this issue. Very cool stuff if you can find it all.
 
1069 said:
I severely compromised my hymen in grade school, as a result of an unfortunate accident with a jungle gym..
Click to expand...
:lamo :2rofll: thatt is one of the funniest things i have read here in a long time
 
DeeJayH said:
:lamo :2rofll: thatt is one of the funniest things i have read here in a long time
Click to expand...

It really wasn't funny at the time.
I still have nightmares about nuns pulling down my panties and looking at my poor little injured girly parts.

:(;)
 
1069 said:
It really wasn't funny at the time.
I still have nightmares about nuns pulling down my panties and looking at my poor little injured girly parts.

:(;)
Click to expand...

Freud would have a field day with that:mrgreen:
 
Dynamic said:
That's interesting that you would not know that most people who think of sex in such a high regard do consider having sex as giving one self away. But not for free. It's a spiritual thing, and there is no real personal gain that is materializable.
Click to expand...
A spiritual thing? Sex? LOL I think if it's "spiritual", they're doing it wrong. ;)

You're taking "selling a body" as a literal sense.
Click to expand...
The people SAYING it are taking it literal, since figuratively we ALL "sell our bodies" every single day.

It's not meant to be literal. You can sell ones body for a night or for an hour or for how long one see's fit. Usually prostitutes do sell their body--not just sex. Prostitutes are usually willing to perform almost any sex act (I know this is not always the case). In some cases they are expected to be extremely submissive while another perosn has their way with them.
Click to expand...
No, they are expected to perform a service agreed upon by both parties beforehand.

What is sex exactly? How can one sell sex? Define sex in clear terms so it cannot be misconstued. Is sex only access to the vagina? It is only access to sexual organs? And what would you consider sexual organs since I've noticed a lot of women on here do not think breasts are considered in that catagory? What is the "product" you call sex in black and white? Since really, both terms selling sex, and selling your body both fall into a grey area.
Click to expand...
They're selling a service, just like everyone else in the fricken world. In the case of prostitutes, it's a sexual service. Being a computer admin can have "grey areas". It's not a product that's black and white. Neither is selling janitorial services. Or computer services. Or housekeeping services, or waitressing services. And, btw, aren't waitresses expected to be submissive while people tell them what they want, demand that they are brought what they want, and then get bitchy if it's not "just right"? Isn't the customer "always right"? Aren't they expected to do whatever they're told to?

No service is black and white. The terms of service are always agreed upon by the people involved. People agree upon the terms of their employment upon agreeing to take a job. All jobs are different, even in the same field. Prostitution is no different from any other job in any respect.

Dynamic said:
That's a good point. But I think it's wrong to have to work for money too. But that discussion would be getting a tad bit off topic.
Click to expand...
I wish I didn't have to, but I don't own enough property yet to live off my land without any products from others.
 
Alex said:
You have no right to speak of "imposing", what you want is to impose your morals on another person with laws hidden behind the mask of "society".
Click to expand...

And this is no different than what you are doing, except that your mask is labeled "freedom". You are just as much attempting to impose your moral values upon me as I am attempting to impose my moral values upon Ms. Dylan-- because her "rights" are no more real, no more objective, than my "morals."

Alex said:
Your need to impose your beliefs on other people by force or punishment removes another person's freedom.
Click to expand...

And your need to impose your beliefs on other people-- by the very same force and punishment, no less!-- contributes to the moral decay of society.

Alex said:
Society can not exist without individuals, but individuals exist without society.
Click to expand...

Not for every long, and it is not an existence to be envied. Your argument is based on one of the most unnatural and dehumanizing situations that a human being can be forced into, and is thus not a sound basis for moral philosophy.

Alex said:
If the girl in question is participating in the act of prostitution, then she obviously does not feel "degraded". Exactly what is "degrading" about it? The only thing degrading about it is that people are conditioned to believe it is so.
Click to expand...

It is degrading because she is taking something that is personal and intimate about herself and reducing it to a business transaction. She is reducing herself to an object of someone else's pleasure, for someone that neither cares about her nor has any reason to.

And now, when she does find someone she is willing to share herself with, it will be that much less special, that much less personal and intimate.

Alex said:
What about people with disease who are not prostitutes having sex? What about people who have sex with married people who are not prostitutes?

Are you actually against the act of prostitution, or disease and infidelity?
Click to expand...

I am also opposed to all of these. The only difference is that laws against are so much more difficult to enforce-- and all of these things, for all of the harm that they do, do less harm when prostitution is not involved with them.
 
Don’t know if anyone mentioned it:

She should be taxed so that everyone with equal rights can have some too.
 
It is degrading because she is taking something that is personal and intimate about herself and reducing it to a business transaction.
Click to expand...

Unless she doesn't consider it "something personal and intimate" about herself.

Not everyone views things from your perspective.
As has been previously noted, it's merely social conditioning that causes some people to view sex- or sexual organs- as "something personal and intimate".
When a woman goes in for a gyn exam, is she sharing "something personal and intimate" with the doctor? :roll:
Look, small children don't view their sexual organs as being any different from any other part of their body, until we condition them to believe this.
In fact, they are the ones who are objectively correct, though.
These body parts are merely body parts.
They are not inherently dirty or nasty or wicked; they are not inherently sacred and holy and deeply spiritually meaningful. They are not inherently anything, any more than your eye, ear, nose, belly button, or hand is.
They are merely body parts. They have no inherent meaning, other than what we as a society choose to assign to them.
They do serve a dual biological function: they are organs of elimination and of reproduction, sort of combined into one package. One function is vital to the perpetuation of the species, the other vital to individual survival (as you certainly wouldn't survive long if you didn't have any way to excrete urine).
These are useful functions, to be sure.
These organs, additionally, serve a nonessential function- at least for most of us- namely, providing us with physically pleasurable sensations.
This is probably some sort of evolutionary adaptation to encourage us to reproduce and perpetuate our species, or maybe it's just a happy glitch of anatomy, since there is nothing that encourages us, particularly, to reproduce at the times when we are most fertile and most likely to conceive.

All of the above is objectively true, but there is no objective truth in statements about "intimacy" or statments which attribute some spiritual meaning to sex or to sexual organs.
These are not objective, universal truths. They're subjective.
I trust you recognize the difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom