3 ms·

You are trying to reach too far with this overly facile comparison. Let me show you how: 1. Sexual competition is not nearly as simple as job competition, for

You are trying to reach too far with this overly facile comparison. Let me show you how: 1. Sexual competition is not nearly as simple as job competition, for several reasons. 2. Many people have multiple sex partners, but a single job is staffed by a single person. 3. Sex isn't required to eat or keep a roof over your head. 4. Sex isn't taxed. 5. Sex doesn't go on your resume. 6. Sex is between two people (or so), not a person and a corporate entity. 7. People don't involve lawyers or accountants before having sex. 8. Trading sex for money is, in almost all parts of the US, illegal. 9. Individual's choices leading to STDs or pregnancy don't compare, on a magnitude level, with governmental regulation changes that affect employment because the majority of Americans who have health insurance are only covered thru their employers And, as another commenter wrote, if there is a huge imbalance of power between two sexual partners, that is also often illegal.

yummyfajitas 17y ago
Ok, let me phrase my question more carefully, to avoid getting into a listing of detailed differences and similarities between sex and employment. There is a commonly stated principle, "two consenting adults should be able to do whatever they want in the privacy of their own bedroom." This principle clearly has an unstated limiting clause: "two consenting adults should be able to do whatever they want in privacy, except when ___"). I'm asking what to replace the "___" with. [edit: also curious why I'm being downmodded for asking.]
apotheon 17y ago
> Sexual competition is not nearly as simple as job competition, for several reasons. I think you have an oversimplified view of the employment market. > Many people have multiple sex partners, but a single job is staffed by a single person. Employers often have many, many employees -- sometimes more employees at one time than anyone has sex partners in a decade. > Sex isn't required to eat or keep a roof over your head. . . . and working at IBM probably won't give you herpes. > Sex isn't taxed. Thank goodness. > Sex doesn't go on your resume. Not your professional employment resume, anyway -- unless you have sex professionally (as in the case of porn stars or Las Vegas prostitutes). > Sex is between two people (or so), not a person and a corporate entity. . . . and one doesn't normally fill out an application to get hired by one's spouse. So what? > People don't involve lawyers or accountants before having sex. . . . except sometimes. Have you heard of "white weddings" and "prenuptial agreements"? > Trading sex for money is, in almost all parts of the US, illegal. The porn industry is huge in the US. There's definitely some sex going on, there. > Individual's choices leading to STDs or pregnancy don't compare, on a magnitude level, with governmental regulation changes that affect employment because the majority of Americans who have health insurance are only covered thru their employers On the other hand, governmental regulation changes meant to address STDs do at least match that "magnitude".

yummyfajitas 17y ago

Ok, let me phrase my question more carefully, to avoid getting into a listing of detailed differences and similarities between sex and employment. There is a commonly stated principle, "two consenting adults should be able to do whatever they want in the privacy of their own bedroom." This principle clearly has an unstated limiting clause: "two consenting adults should be able to do whatever they want in privacy, except when ___"). I'm asking what to replace the "___" with. [edit: also curious why I'm being downmodded for asking.]

apotheon 17y ago

> Sexual competition is not nearly as simple as job competition, for several reasons. I think you have an oversimplified view of the employment market. > Many people have multiple sex partners, but a single job is staffed by a single person. Employers often have many, many employees -- sometimes more employees at one time than anyone has sex partners in a decade. > Sex isn't required to eat or keep a roof over your head. . . . and working at IBM probably won't give you herpes. > Sex isn't taxed. Thank goodness. > Sex doesn't go on your resume. Not your professional employment resume, anyway -- unless you have sex professionally (as in the case of porn stars or Las Vegas prostitutes). > Sex is between two people (or so), not a person and a corporate entity. . . . and one doesn't normally fill out an application to get hired by one's spouse. So what? > People don't involve lawyers or accountants before having sex. . . . except sometimes. Have you heard of "white weddings" and "prenuptial agreements"? > Trading sex for money is, in almost all parts of the US, illegal. The porn industry is huge in the US. There's definitely some sex going on, there. > Individual's choices leading to STDs or pregnancy don't compare, on a magnitude level, with governmental regulation changes that affect employment because the majority of Americans who have health insurance are only covered thru their employers On the other hand, governmental regulation changes meant to address STDs do at least match that "magnitude".