Conquer Club

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/brazilian-stud ... 34755.html

show

Highlights:

A Brazilian (Migliorini ) student has sold her virginity in an online auction for US$780,000 as part of a documentary organised by an Australian filmmaker, although a man who did the same only fetched US$3,000.

Australian media said Migliorini would be "delivered" to her buyer on board a plane to Australia and that she would be interviewed before and after losing her virginity at a secret location.

On a "Virgins Wanted" trailer on YouTube, Migliorini said: "I haven't found the right person to do it with, I've been too busy with other stuff."

She added: "It's more sane than doing it drunk at a party with a stranger."

("PROSTITUTE!!!" a few scream.)

"I saw this as a business. I have the opportunity to travel, to be part of a movie and get a bonus with it," she was quoted by the Mail as saying.

"If you only do it once in your life then you are not a prostitute, just like if you take one amazing photograph it does not automatically make you a photographer."

She will reportedly use part of the cash to build homes for poverty-stricken families.

Is this better than getting drunk while losing your virginity?

Are her actions morally good or bad?



The Beebsian View:

show

BigBallinStalin wrote:
Is this better than getting drunk while losing your virginity?

You'll find out when you're older.

pics?

jonesthecurl wrote:pics?

You'll find out when you're older?

(Look, I'll send you some, but only if you drop that bag of kittens... into the river).

While I see nothing objectively wrong about this, it makes me a little sad. Maybe I'm just a romantic, but the first time should be something special not a transaction. That being said for 780k all the more power to her, that's pretty special.

I still voted somewhat disapprove though. It is not a rational disapproval but an emotional one. It just feels wrong to me.

Baron Von PWN wrote:While I see nothing objectively wrong about this, it makes me a little sad. Maybe I'm just a romantic, but the first time should be something special not a transaction. That being said for 780k all the more power to her, that's pretty special.

I still voted somewhat disapprove though. It is not a rational disapproval but an emotional one. It just feels wrong to me.

Thousands of years ago, I would've have voted your way too, but the positive economist within me says, "this is actually great!"

Because not everyone values virginity the same way, and everyone has different opportunity costs. She's an entrepreneur with the support of her family seeking opportunities from which she expects to immensely profit. The voluntary exchange benefits both parties (ex-ante), but maybe ex-post. Nevertheless, she hopefully will have significant funds to positively change her community as well to benefit herself (education?) and her family (perhaps servicing all debts?).

So due to the positivist (objective) reasons above, this will reinforce my value judgments regarding voluntary exchange and the benefits of profit.

With that in mind, I gotta vote "strongly approve."

meh, I'd pay like five bucks.

Sounds like someone got suckered but hopefully the student will put the money to better use than the winner of the auction did.
Morally speaking, at the risk of sounding ignorant, hasn't this sort of thing basically been going on in Japan for quite some time, only there the winner gets to keep the girl? I don't really object to it from a moral standpoint, just feel sorry for the schmuck who won. Does it count as taking someone's virginity if you've paid almost a million dollars lol? Could you even perform knowing the cash you'd blown? At any rate I don't even think it counts for anything, like Baron noted, at least not in the girl's mind.
Furthermore, I demand a picture of the wrinkled geezer who won.

Army of GOD wrote:meh, I'd pay like five bucks.

Eight.

2dimes wrote:

Army of GOD wrote:meh, I'd pay like five bucks.

Eight.

$9.75 if I get a blowjob as well.

If you just grab one of those does that allow her to stay in the auction?

I think it's fine for the woman. Why not make a few few bucks instead of "giving it" to some drunk frat boy at a kegger?

I doubt she got the entire $780K... but even if she only kept a portion of that it's fine.

In regards to the "john" side of the question... and the comments from some posters. Some thoughts...

*Personally I don't think I would be interested in paying for it. Not because of this woman in particular... but in general. I have never paid for it, and a significant portion of the enjoyment I get from it (sex) comes from knowing that my partner wants to be with me; and knowing that she's enjoying herself too. If I pay for it, I obviously don't get those same feelings.

THAT SAID I see nothing wrong if other people want to pay for it since their pleasure may be derived from the act more than the feelings... and I won't say I'd NEVER pay for it, cause we all change throughout our lives.

*To those who say they "feel sorry" for the guy who paid for this woman.... obviously these posters have not put themselves into his shoes. If he can pay $780K it's reasonable to assume he's loaded (financially) in way most of us can't comprehend. If his net worth is in the hundreds of millions, this may be the equivalent (to him) of dropping $100 on a night out on the town. It's just not a big deal.

*To those who post this girl's picture and say they'd pay $5... or some other silly number trying to be funny. Let's be honest here. You may pay $5 or nothing, because like me you just don't care to pay for it. That's fine.

THAT SAID to imply this woman is ugly is just being stoopid. Is she a supermodel... no. Is she the MOST attractive woman I've seen every... or even recently... no. Is she ugly, NO. She is cute... fairly attractive... well above "average" for sure. Anyone of use (men) here would DO her and be happy to (excluding those men who are gay, or married and faithful, or not able to have sex for some other reason).

jimboston wrote:*To those who say they "feel sorry" for the guy who paid for this woman.... obviously these posters have not put themselves into his shoes. If he can pay $780K it's reasonable to assume he's loaded (financially) in way most of us can't comprehend. If his net worth is in the hundreds of millions, this may be the equivalent (to him) of dropping $100 on a night out on the town. It's just not a big deal.

Does a "loaded" person ever pay $1,000 dollars for a Snickers Bar?

While the price sounds too high to be true, I agree with Senior Boston that the only way it would occur is via someone like he describes.

As for the snickers analogy. Supply and demand. If the guy can't find a snickers bar on safari in Africa and you've got one for auction. A few other rediculasly wealthy guys start bidding for it...

The girl is a fucking genius, as a poor person if I could get a fraction of that for something as simple as losing my V-card. It doesn't even matter what the person who bought me would look like.

2dimes wrote:While the price sounds too high to be true, I agree with Senior Boston that the only way it would occur is via someone like he describes.

As for the snickers analogy. Supply and demand. If the guy can't find a snickers bar on safari in Africa and you've got one for auction. A few other rediculasly wealthy guys start bidding for it...

Is the supply of virgins so low? The guy needs to go on his own safari evidently.

Crazyirishman wrote:The girl is a fucking genius, as a poor person if I could get a fraction of that for something as simple as losing my V-card. It doesn't even matter what the person who bought me would look like.

What if I won?






Btw, a comparison between the girl at the time of the start of the auction and one at the end if anyone is insteresed:







Appears she has developed a fondness for Snickers since the auction started. "Sorry fella, this auction is non-refundable."

By the way, all the guys trying to sell their's the top rate was $3K. I'm pretty sure the going rate is double figures at best.

Funkyterrance wrote:

jimboston wrote:*To those who say they "feel sorry" for the guy who paid for this woman.... obviously these posters have not put themselves into his shoes. If he can pay $780K it's reasonable to assume he's loaded (financially) in way most of us can't comprehend. If his net worth is in the hundreds of millions, this may be the equivalent (to him) of dropping $100 on a night out on the town. It's just not a big deal.

Does a "loaded" person ever pay $1,000 dollars for a Snickers Bar?

If he's living on a secluded island in the middle of the Pacific and wants that bar airlifted in RIGHT NOW... then maybe.

Maybe said rich person has a problem with candy and obesity, and he has setup a system were he pay $1000 for each bar (to a charity) to help him limit or control his chocolate eating in some way?

That said, I understand your point.

At the same time... to some people, the "cherry" of a young and fairly attractive girl would not be considered the equivalent of a snickers bar... since said "cherry" is a one-time event for that particular woman. There are a limitted supply of "cherries" of legal age... no?

In summary, even if it was a JUST a snickers bar we were talking about... I wouldn't "feel sorry" for an ultra-rich person spending $1000 on one if it was on a lark or a random event.

2dimes wrote:While the price sounds too high to be true, I agree with Senior Boston that the only way it would occur is via someone like he describes.

As for the snickers analogy. Supply and demand. If the guy can't find a snickers bar on safari in Africa and you've got one for auction. A few other rediculasly wealthy guys start bidding for it...

You beat me to the point/response.