Hi, my name is Tim. I advocate the formation of Sexocracy, which is the term I use for what I believe is the optimum form of society.

In a Sexocracy there is no financial economy. The economy is status based. There are just four statuses:

Rehabilitative status: This status is for criminals only. I anticipate that crime in a Sexocracy would be extremely low. Only serious criminals would require rehabilitative status so the population of the Sexocracy living at this status would be very low or zero.

Standard status: This status would be available for everyone except those on rehab status and would provide a basic standard of living.

Luxury status: This status would provide a luxury standard of living and would be given to everyone who worked or was incapable of work.

Super luxury status: This status would be available only to ‘Sexual Service Providers (SSPs)’ who in today’s society would be described as prostitutes and/or pornographic models. SSPs would have the highest levels of luxury and also would be the most respected and adored members of Sexocratic society.

In a Sexocracy everyone would be able to fulfill their sexual desires because of the accessibility of SSPs. They wouldn’t have to feel guilty about using SSPs as the SSPs would enjoy the highest levels of luxury and using their services would be considered natural and healthy. Also drugs would be legalized and regulated for adult use.

That is the essential structure of Sexocracy. I believe the formation of a Sexocracy is the only path to maximum human happiness and minimal human suffering.

As far as Republics go, that’s not a bad one.

At the very least it’s better than a certain cantankerous Greek’s…

I think we should just separate it into 2 classes of people, the hos and the pimps. And then throw in free rent for everyone, like Nameta said, and free food. And then we’re all set.

Thanks, Pezer.

Society needs to function as one single, flowing being. With each part perpetually sustaining and invigorating the other. Society needs to exist in harmony with the forces of nature rather than constantly trying to define itself against them.

society needs more sex toys

What is keeping you from taking this as a legitimate idea? (edit-well… as legitimate as any governmental or statist proposal.)

because of the apparent lack of any basic idea of how economics works.


Well, where are the contradictions?

Not directed at me but…
Well ,where would the funding for the luxury come from?

If it is just status based and with no financial system there is no way to buy sex/food/anything except bartering/exchange of services. Basically it would become (pardon my vulgarity) a “will give blowjobs for food” scenario.
You need food to live but no matter how much we want sex, it is not required to live. So very quickly those with food would inflate the price via intercourse to outrages extremes leaving the “super luxury” individuals as whores on the street corners (exactly where they are now).

Unless its like a communist state where everyone works and their products are given to the government which relocates them based on promiscuity/physical attractiveness.

It also forgets a major point, most prostitutes don’t do their jobs because they like giving to the community, they do it to pay the bills and feed themselves/their addictions. Standard status is apparently able to feed and house individuals, so once the whores can reach that status, there is no need to sell their bodies and most likely would not. It is not the beautiful girls that become prostitutes and porn-stars, it is the desperate and the abused. You could probably get porn-stars to keep providing, but prostitutes probably would not.

And once it becomes acceptable to use these SSPs they will be inaccessible to the un-attractive. When a hooker can choose their partners, they will probably choose the rich or the beautiful (and since this system would in theory remove rich people who are not SSPs, that means only the beautiful would get service).

This system will either be as successful as communism (which it could easily be a twisted version of) or if it is different type of system, it will have an even worse success rate.

equal2u, haven’t we had this thread before (or at least one that went to the same destination)? viewtopic.php?f=6&t=175025

looks to me like we’re just equating power to who we have sex with

in order to live the good life, i would need be a sexual service provider

requiring a demand for me to be a sexual service provider

okay lets give it a go, who’s first in line?

Can I work part-time? And can I have the cushiest job and enjoy the same luxury as a neurosurgeon?

Your maximum happiness perhaps.

What happens when you turn 82? Or if you’re fat and ugly? Can you still be a SSP?

There aren’t any.

There is no ‘funding’ because it isn’t a financial economy. Funding is money and there is no money in a Sexocracy. No one buys anything, the things are given to them. It isn’t a bartering economy it is a status based economy.

People on luxury status receive luxury goods and services. They access luxury status by working in society and providing their fair contribution of goods and services to society. Becuse of the super luxury status given to the SSPs, everyone is sexually fulfilled due to the SSPs’ accessibility and their beauty. This makes people efficient and productive. It’s very simple and elegant.

In today’s society prostitutes have miserable existences, in the Sexocracy they are happy because they are the most economically rewarded and socially elevated members of society.

The ‘destination’ I intend for this thread is the formation of Sexocracy across the world, bringing a world without war and poverty and with dramatically increased human happiness and reduced suffering.

To be an SSP you have to be young and beautiful. The system encourages the most beautiful people to enter the SSP profession.

Well, then the system really sucks for fat, ugly, and old people.

The system is fantastic for fat, ugly and old people because it means they can have lots of guilt free sex with slim, beautiful, young people.

I think you need to go back to the first post and read it again carefully. You really don’t seem to get it.

And that makes life better for them? Is that what life’s all about? Having sex?

First of all, it seems your system doesn’t allow for equality of opportunities. Those ugly, fat, and old people have no hope of ever attaining SLS.

Also, how do they buy food and shelter in your system? Is sex supposed to replace money in your system? Do they have sex with someone for food and shelter? Who’s gonna want to have sex with fat, ugly, and old people?

Just exploring your idea’s all I’m doing.