What are the moral and cultural implications of treating sex as a commodity?

Sex has been treated as a commodity for at least decades.

When sex was separated from procreation, marriage ceased to be about raising a family, and instead became an exchange of sexual intimacy for financial and/or emotional support and companionship.

Are you getting what I'm saying here? In an intentionally childless marriage, sex is already being treated as a commodity. The dirty little secret of the twentieth century is that reliable birth control, for many people, has made marriage into a kind of covert prostitution.

Well, depending on where your moral compass points will determine the implications. Mine points to a cross and thus it is strictly forbidden. Implications are hell, STD's, unwanted life, and trauma (physical and mental).

As a commodity it is great. You sell it and you still have it. Women can finally get paid more than men and no one would complain. Negative is similar to above but since everyone has the commodity the value could fluctuate.

I do not wish to be cruel, but having read the article (what can I say I am a guy and do things backwards). Were I to win the bid I would have a clause in the contract for a money back guarantee if she did not bleed. I would not bid by the way. Way too demeaning.

You're not "Ent Lawyer" too, are you . . . ?

Honestly, I think it was only a matter of time, not that I think it's a good idea or anything. Heck, Orwell wrote about sex as a political statement in 1948.

As far as the $$ situation is concerned . . . and trying on my "feminist" glasses (lol) . . . it would seem that the girl "loses" twice if she pays the man, her $$ and her virginity. The fact that she's auctioning it shows that she disagrees, at least in theory, with the idea that men do (should) prefer experienced partners, offering herself as blatantly inexperienced as possible.

When sex is a commodity and the human body a mere machine anything goes. The problem of course is the breakdown of families, the spreading of diseases, the horrid reality of the child slaughter industry, the inevitable societal acceptance of the objectification of women. I could go on but I think my point is clear. It is worth noting, despite my not being catholic, that Paul VI predicted all of this before the sexual revolution had begun to take it's toll. I ain't Catholic and wont be any time soon, but you guys are right more often than not when it comes to sexual/reproductive morality.

As life cannot be measured in money similarly virginity cannot be measured in money, it very natural as death, nature decides the time we are just the follower and we feel as if we are controlling it, so sex is not a commodity it is the need of the human-being to give birth and exist on this planet, so it cannot become a desire to be measured in commodity.

People going to prostitutes are an edict and it becomes a desperate need for them which is not legal for a normal human being.

If sex treats as commodity,we should obey the business laws.

we always prefer an experienced driver,if so why not an experienced

sex partner?

Moral and culture are directly affect the supply and demand.

Regarding your first question: It depends on how your culture views sex. Using sex for gain is the oldest profession in the world, such that even animals routinely do it.

In many ways this girl selling herself is no different than the cultural norm of some Native Alaskans who would offer their wives sexually to friends. In both cases it is being used as an insurance policy for the future. The girl is using sex to ensure an affordable education that will provide for her in the future and not bankrupt her in the process, much like an insurance policy against poverty. The Alaskan believes that his tribe mate will share scare resources in lean times, especially if there is a chance one of the Alaskan's children has been sired by him. To throw in a third scenario, lets look at the woman who marries for money. This happens everyday as evidenced by the long list of trophy wives frequently accumulated by the rich and powerful. Is this much different from prostitution, especially when this rich and powerful man decides to move on to the next trophy, leaving the previous wife penniless and "used up" as far as trophy wife possibilities go?

From a moral perspective, what does this say. This tells me that the insanely escalating cost of college is morally wrong. It tells me that unequal pay for woman but still expecting them to pay the same amount for an education is morally wrong. It tells me that we live in a society where some people feel strongly compelled to subjugate themselves as objects in order to level the playing field since that appears to be the only way to actually level it at the moment. On a personal note: It tells me that I am glad I got my degree before the cost reached a level that could put you in the poor house before you earned your first dime from it.

The question regarding a man being paid to take a girl's virginity is silly at best. It is the law to supply and demand, and heaven knows when it comes to sex, most men are demanding more than woman are willing to supply. This is not to mention the role the male psyche plays in the desire to be the first.

I think that you may miss something in terms of cause and effect, here.

I think that, while our ideals say one thing about our person, they do not work themselves out in reality, incarnationally.

The real question is: How is treating sex as a commodity a **reflection** of our morals, culture and theology?

That this woman or her sister see nothing wrong with selling themselves indicates their theology and view of personhood, which is a reflection of the culture's theology of personhood.

Sex is the oldest trading of this world. In some way it is a kind of business and otherway it is a kind of enjoyment.But always sex trading is nothing just degradation of moral and cultural values.

I don't understand how she expects that anyone will pay enough for a college tuition. That seems a little arrogant.

Not that she shouldn't have the money, but does she really deserve THAT MUCH for having sex with some stranger?