Is Carrot Dating, the Bribe-Based Dating App, Really So Bad? | Hacker News Reader

Is Carrot Dating, the Bribe-Based Dating App, Really So Bad?

motherboard.vice.com

19 pointsJun823 comments

What a curious example of symbiosis. Guy trolls journalists with a deliberately controversial app, knowing he can count on their indignation to make them write about how awful it is and thus send him lots of traffic. And then an "edgy" publication passes on the troll directly to us by defending it, thereby getting attention for themselves as well.

I've never understood why prostitution is still illegal. A mutually acceptable transaction between two adults shouldn't be regulated.

Because it leads to trafficking.

There are many countries where it is legal and regulated (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_law#Prostitution_l...).

I am willing to bet that in the vast majority of cases (in the US), it is exploitative to women. Women who stand on street corners and sell themselves are usually not doing it because they think of themselves as liberated. They do it because they need to make ends meet, and because if they don't, they will get in trouble with their boss. When people on HN think about prostitution, they think of escorts, not $50 hookers (or women who don't even get paid).

But how much of that is because there is no legal recourse when a prostitute is defrauded? One of the reasons for pimps is to provide protection where the law won't.

That's why in many of the countries where prostitution is legal, pimping is still illegal.

On the other hand, the results of at least one study suggest that prostitutes who work with pimps earn more, work less hours and have lower rates of injury.

Extreme Prelimary Study here: http://economics.uchicago.edu/pdf/Prostitution%205.pdf

Note, for better or for worse, one of the authors is associated with "freakaonimcs."

This is exactly why we need legalization, transparency, regulation, and probably unionization. All those things tend to suppress the exploitative side.

Your willingness to bet on this just does not help anyone. Are you on that corner? Is that your family? Do you understand, in a visceral sense, the options these people do or don't have, and does your moral indignation give more credence to your point of view than to the people who actually do this, and more perspective on their lives?

And thanks for letting us know what we are discussing when we talk about prostitution. I hope we're not all as ignorant as you think we are, because many of us almost certainly know what actual prostitution is, how seedy it can be, and that "escorts" -- to which you ascribe some ridiculous notion of universal high-brow status -- is what we think of, while you're wisely pondering the true nature of the sex trade.

Sorry, this is just really, really presumptuous, and I have a hard time reading it.

It does not happen as an isolated event. You're oversimplifying.

Wrong; every time it happens, it happens as an isolated event. That it happens frequently is the only thing that makes people decide it should be viewed and regulated on a higher level.

The only reason prostitution is outlawed in certain places is because those places have accepted as part of their governance certain values specific to sex and its relation to commerce.

Because it only shouldn't be regulated between consenting adults. And those are surprisingly rare in the sex industry.

I used to think the same way, and then started reading the studies. It turns out that legalized sex work increases trafficking [1], and most prostitutes actually do not consent to their work, even in countries where it is legal [2].

I'm not sure what the solution to the issue is. I am fairly certain that restrictive immigration policies give traffickers an excellent choke hold for their victims, though.

[1] http://www.heart-intl.net/HEART/081004/natasha_trade.pdf

[2] http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J189v02n03_03#.Um...

> It turns out that legalized sex work increases trafficking

And sales of sugary drinks increases diabetes. Should Obama pull a Bloomberg and ban large soda sales nationwide?

Drinking sodas is a personal choice. Being trafficked isn't.

that last bit seems a little extreme without limiting conditions. can you imagine legal civil contracts where the penalty for violating it in some fashion is death?

The crudeness of the intro video on the site and the PR material aside (quite successful in its sensationalistic goal) it's really interesting to read people's reactions to them. The idea is in fact prevalent in the animal kingdom, e.g. male spiders routinely give presents to females to mate with them (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/02/0214_050214_...). The notion, of course, is that us, being humans, are way above these animalistic methods. Are we? As the Merovingian puts it: "And this is the nature of the universe. We struggle against it. We fight to deny it, but it is of course pretense. It is a lie. Beneath our poised appearance, the truth is we are completely... out of control".

It's kind of hilarious to see a Merovingian quote here, but I agree that the ridiculous "we're people, not animals" argument can't be disparaged enough. A limited but very significant example of this is the fact that the vast majority of money made on mobile apps and games depends on behavioral conditioning. You know... ring the bell, dog salivates? We've been doing this for decades -- just look at my Final Fantasy collection -- but only now is it really juicing us for cash at optimal levels. And it's not because we're Impressively Sophisticated.

I don't understand what's wrong with this. Of course it is crude and the creator comments are offensive. But the creator does not sugar-coat the product in any way. He clearly says its a dating app to bribe woman. He's calling a spade, a spade. And I am sure there will be enough men who want to use this to get dates. If you don't like the idea, don't use it. Why bash the creator. Let the idea die because of lack of attention.

I find it funny that (as I expect) there would be much less buzz if they have used "gift" instead of "bribe". I'm really curious what the final reaction of the potential customers (of both sexes) will be. My guess is the majority of both man & women will reject such unromantic way to find the "other half". Of course if this app is about long-term relationships at all.

Even if it is prostitution what is wrong with it ?

Pretty funny, I'm not a feminist or a conservative so I don't think there's anything wrong with this, although it looks like a recipe for getting ripped off.

Without invoking any feminism or conservatism, I think it's fair to say that encouraging personal relationships to involve bribery (even if the use of the word is in a tongue-in-cheek manner) devalues them and pushes them towards being transactions. Call me old-school, but I do not want my personal, friend, or business relationships to be transactions.

My opinion would be that this seems like a very slick way (by both the app, and it's colourful carefree branding, and the article, written carefully to benefit from controversy and deflect criticism) to gloss over a fundamentally ugly idea.

Looking at the list of incentives, I see that it starts off with paying for a meal. I've always thought that the societal expectation that (1) men should ask women out on a date and (2) because they made the invitation they are responsible for picking up the bill is just a form of low-rent prostitution.

I've only dated women who were willing to go dutch and I'm glad that society has been moving away from that norm because it belittles women, particularly the ones who don't recognize it as such, because it says you are valued simply for being female (like 50% of the population) rather than valued for what makes you uniquely you.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com