On this blog, we have often discussed the basis for prostitution from rivaling feminist and libertarian perspectives. Critics have long argued that the definition and prohibition of prostitution is inherently flawed and conflicted. Others argue that it is a denial of the rights of consenting adults under a state enforced morality standard. Brazilian student, Catarina Migliorini, 20, has rekindled this debate after selling her virginity online to a Japanese man named Natsu for $772,000.
Migliorini’s virginity was the subject of bids by 15 people– an auction organized by Jason Sisely, an Australian filmmaker.
Alex Stepanov, 21, from Sydney, also put his virginity up for sale, but was able to collect only £1,860 from a Nene B from Brazil.
Migliorini will be flown to Australia where she and Stepanov will meet the winning bidders and lose their virginity. Under the contract, the minimum time the virgin must spend with the bidder is one hour and in that time “the virgin must engage in sexual intercourse with the highest bidder”.
Notably, Migliorini denied being a prostitute. “I saw this as a business. I have the opportunity to travel, to be part of a movie and get a bonus with it.” Of course, most prostitute view their work also as a business, but Migliorini insisted “[i]f 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.”
That does not seem a particularly convincing line of argument. It is reminiscent of the famous Churchillian story about “price.” According to legend, Winston Churchill once asked a socialite if she would sleep with him for 1 million pounds. When she admitted that she would, he offered one pound. “Winston! What sort of woman do you think I am?,” the woman objected. He responded, “We have already established what you are, now we are just haggling over price.”
Nevertheless, she might be on better ground arguing that this is ultimately a moral choice. Virginity clearly does not mean much to her and she sees it as a commodity to be sold. The money that she will receive is enough to set her up for life. If this is a consensual agreement between adults, should society still criminalize the conduct. After all, she can legally have sex with in infinite number of partners. She also can legally receive an assortment of gifts before such encounters from meals to trips to jewelry. It is not unknown for individuals to sleep with others to achieve benefits of various sorts, but are not considered prostitutes. Likewise, a porn star can have sex with dozens of partners for money but not be charged with prostitution since it is done on film. What is left is an uncertain line in defining prostitution.
Yet, when she wants to accept money for such services, she would be considered by most as committing the crime of prostitution. So long as these arrangements involve consenting adults, should the arrangements still be considered criminal?
92 thoughts on “Haggling Over Price: Brazilian Woman Sells Virginity on Internet But Insists That She Is Not A Prostitute”
We dont know he was Japanese and we certainly do know they get false virginities all the time so as to con people for money. To do this publically is dangerous as others start these scams and get rich dangerous schemes. Wives and girlfriends get badly heartbroken when they discover a man they loved is giving a fortune to prostitues who even pretend its for charity. I see prettier decent hardwoprking girls in macdonalds. She was cracked before no doubt. as for her mouth, yuk.
What consenting adults do in the privacy of their own bedrooms, is not my concern. The government, any government, should get out of the anti-sex business. Completely criminalizing all aspects of prostitution just pushes it underground.
Catarina Migliorini May Not Be Able To Prove Virginity, Experts Say
Not being able to prove providence can certainly throw a monkey wrench into a commercial transaction.
And marriage has been called legal prostitution. The method of payment and obligations are different, but the principle is the same, say some.
I have wondered about that one time and now seems like an opportuned tome to get the nut cracked by an expert.
No praise intended. Just straight talk here.
“But my genuine question is, for how long is she a prostitute?”
I’m pretty sure it’s a transactional relationship, Doug. Just because you don’t keep books anymore doesn’t make you not a bookkeeper. It makes you an inactive bookkeeper. Attorney’s who quit practicing law don’t cease to be lawyers. They cease practicing. A murderer, even if they only killed once, does not cease to be a murderer. Just so, ask any alcoholic. There are no ex-alcoholics. Just alcoholics and recovering alcoholics. A person is the accumulation of their experiences and actions. We are what our pasts make us. We are what we are even if we don’t actively engage in past activities.
Should she have to wear a scarlet A on her chest for the rest of her life?
But what she’s doing is prostitution and that makes her a prostitute.
I’m not passing judgment and did not think you were either. But my genuine question is, for how long is she a prostitute? If she intends to prostitute herself only once and at the end of her life she has still done it only once, is she still a prostitute? Am I still a bookkeeper at the end of my life if I stopped long ago? I think that is relevant to how we use the word.
Good point, GeneH.
Do you think the world cares? I don’t think it does, ie unfortunately the world doesn’t care about incorrect word use.
Why, look at the massive indifference to the terms misused by our leaders. And that is far more serious than eventual misuse here. Do we agree? Of course we do.
But a little fun we will all have, ie playing our games.
There are different words for different things in the English language for a reason.
This woman is not a psychological professional, sex therapist, sex surrogate or otherwise.
She’s selling her virginity – i.e. having sex – in exchange for money with no mitigating circumstances ergo she’s a prostitute.
Whether prostitution should or should not be illegal is a separate issues. Whether or not the word prostitute carries an inherent negative value load in our society is a separate issue. The bottom line is she is what she is and that word in English is “prostitute”. At no time did I pass judgement on her or her choices. It should be clear by this time that I’m at best indifferent and think prostitution should be legal.
My objection was that her saying she was not a prostitute is simply and categorically false by definition.
Writing the day after is at times fun, mostly for yourself. But not otherwise.
Mohammed is said to have proclaimed (sura?) that men and women are EQUAL in the eyes of Allah.
Is it observerd? Nope.
Just like Jesus words are said to be ignored also.
Thanks Malisha! What do I win? 🙂
You are not alone!
Regarding religion: I may have been considered a second class believer but I became a first class leaver.
Rafflaw, “second class believers.” That’s hilarious! You get today’s prize!
Comments are closed.