January 6, 2020
It’s a pretty good publicity stunt.
Women are good at using sex to make money.
An American model has raised more than NZ$750,000 for the Australian bushfire victims by promising to send nude selfies to those who donate.
Los Angeles woman Kaylen Ward decided to do what she could to help the relief efforts by encouraging followers to donate at least $10 in exchange for an X-rated image of herself.
“Every $10 you donate = one nude picture from me to your DM. You must send me confirmation that you donated,” the 20-year-old wrote on Twitter.
Within minutes, her private messages on Instagram and Twitter were bombarded by hundreds of people sending in their receipts to prove they had donated.
Her post has received more than 123,000 likes, 56,000 retweets and thousands of comments.
Ward said she was motivated to use her following to contribute to the cause after photos surfaced of the catastrophic conditions.
All the donations I still haven’t got to yet! We’re already at $10,000 before all of these. How much money do you guys think we have raised? pic.twitter.com/LNvdq3qkxT
— THE NAKED PHILANTHROPIST (@lilearthangelk) January 4, 2020
“It’s devastating and any normal person would be concerned and want to help,” she said.
In her post, she asked followers to donate directly to a list of numerous charities including NSW Rural Fire Service, Victorian Country Fire Service, Red Cross and certain koala hospitals across Australia.
Despite the enormous effort from Ward and her fans, the stunt has implications for her career as an Instagram model, with the company disabling her account for violating community guidelines.
“My IG [Instagram] got deleted, my family disowned me, and the guy I like won’t talk to me all because of that tweet,” she posted on Sunday.
“But f**k it, save the koalas.”
“Guys I am crying, this is f***king crazy”.
I’m going to go out on a limb and say that this will not negatively affect her “career” as an internet slut.
It will in fact be great for her slut career.
There is something interesting to analyze here, what with the tying of morality (global warming is the ultimate morality, and this fire is supposedly somehow related to global warming, and “donating to a cause” is also the definition of moral goodness) to pornography.
I don’t feel I have the energy to analyze it just now, however.
A reader provided the analysis of the situation:
Woman posts photograph, which is a collection of pixels of varying colour and shade, representing the play of light on an object, in this case a female face, which has been enhanced for this photograph with the use of light-reflecting silicones on ths skin to even out skin tone (a sign of health and youth), injectables into the face to enhance the effect of high oestrogen on the face (full lips and cheekbones), also a sign of fertility/youth, and to highlight neoteny. A nosejob will also highlight feminine neotany. On top of this a probable filter.
Male viewer looks at this collection of pixels, judging the face represented in terms of symmetry, oestrogenic effect, neoteny, and the sexual availability evinced by the facial expression, and decides from this photograph if the breasts and genitals of the object are worth looking at (the lizard brain conflates looking at them with access to them). The breasts may also be silicone, but the man reasons that they will nevertheless be as pleasing to look at as the face.
The man pays his ten dollars of fiat currency, vaguely aroused by the idea that for less than an hour’s labour he has effectively entered into a transaction for this young woman whom he does not know to expose herself to him, an act that in traditional societies would probably mean his death, hers, or both. He’s happy that the money is going to a good cause anyway, even though under the fiat currency scheme the Australian government could easily print up the required currency to pay for any rescue operations needed.
The young woman is high on the idea of her only social worth, her sexuality, being prized so highly in such a public way, and being able to cover this obvious act of female narcissism and signalling social status to her peers (sexual rivals) with the cover of it being an act of public good, a selfless act for others. Others, however, particularly the man whom she desired, are troubled by the fact that this woman places her most valuable asset, her female modesty/sexuality, at only ten dollars, as while only her representation has been exchanged in this transaction, the social implications are the same.
Seems to sum things up pretty well.