Many organizations say their purpose is to do good. Many of these do good by trying to entice other people to do good. And some of these organizations entice by offering prizes and awards; they commit ahead of time to giving cash or attention to those who achieve particular things, or to those chosen by some committee as the best in a category.
People also do a very wide range of things to support their causes. They sacrifice cash, attention, time, status, and comfort. They suffer dirt, ridicule, exhaustion, and risks of death. They forgo desired careers, homes, friends. Some are willing to be seen naked, or to withhold sex from specified disapproved folks. Some are even willing to hurt or kill other folks.
But to my knowledge, no (non-prostitute) group has ever explicitly offered sex as a prize or reward for doing good. Any group that declared a regular public sex prize would no doubt get lots of publicity, they wouldn’t violate any laws, nor pay much beyond the sex itself, and yet no one has done this. Why?
Consider how repelled most people today are by arranged marriages, or by a woman agreeing to have sex with her husband at unspecified future times of his choosing. We also much more respect prostitutes who can veto customers, and who often exercise this power. And we are surprisingly accepting of most any sex as long as it “felt right” to the parties at the time.
It seems to me we accept something close to a moral principle that one’s subconscious must always have the option to veto sex. Especially for women, this principle seems to have a far greater priority than any pro-charity principles, and even than self-preservation principles. It is far more acceptable to risk your life than to offer sex for a good cause, no matter how great that cause.
From a conversation with Rob Wiblin and Katja Grace.