Hypothetical: Get laid and save the world!

A sadistic mad alien has left you with an ultimatum. You must choose from three people of your preferred gender to have sex with. One is really hot, one is kind of meh, and the third is a total uggo. If you don’t choose, sadistic mad alien blows up the world.

The only thing you know about these three people is that they are “willing” participants.* What you don’t know is if they are doing it because they want to or if they are only doing it to save the world. (or both)

Whom do you choose?

*I’m not sure you could call it “willing” when left with such an ultimatum.

What are you trying to learn from this? All other tings being equal, why do you imagine someone would choose a less attractive sex partner if they knew all the possible partners would say “yes”?

I think it amounts to “would you prefer an ugly partner who really wants to fuck you, or a beautiful one who’s prepared to do it but not really that into you?”

Edit: Sorry, meant to add that because you have no way of knowing how they feel before you start, why wouldn’t you choose the hot one?

Gee, this is a real brain teaser. Decisions, decisions.

What’s the agenda here?

Every time I think I’ve read the most inane hypothetical, along comes something new.

Do you get a million dollars if you choose the ugly one? If not I don’t get it.

I would choose the person closest to my own level of attractiveness, so the really hot one. :slight_smile:

Yea, this seems like a pretty pointless question without more preconditions.

“All else being equal, would you like me to give you $100, $1000, or $1,000,000 tax-free?” “Um, let me think about that”.

So if I don’t get off, the world gets offed.

I’d rather be rich than stupid.

And here I thought Skald must have lost his marbles.

But wait! Why would the beautiful one NOT be “really that into” me?!

I mean, we ARE speaking hypothetically, right?

(I suspect more people would be laughing right now if I had a full-body profile pic to link to.)


In the comic book surge of the late Sixties there was a “Maniaks” book about a so-named band. One of the characters was “Silver Shannon” the ultimate stereotypical gold-digger, who was a bit weak on the concept of a too-heavy diamond engagement ring.

One cover also featured Woody Allen, who was directing a play he also stars in. He instructs her:

“Now in my new play, Shannon, you are madly in love with me because I’m such a rugged handsome specimen of masculinity.”

“I dig, Woody. It’s Science Fiction.”

Is this a parody?

That’s it actually.

Should you enjoy something the other person is having forced upon them?

Why must I choose only one?

Why would I assume the hot chick is somehow more forced than the ugly one?

Isn’t it being forced on me as well?

Maybe the ugly one is more acutely self-conscious of her own physical shortcomings and would feel worse about having sex with strangers than the hot one.

Seriously, unless your scenario gives me some specific evidence that one of these others is either more reluctant or more enthusiastic to have sex with me, there s abslolutely no reason not to choose the most attractive one.

I wouldn’t take part in such a thing, because those “willing” participants would be under duress and not legally be capable of giving consent. So the question is, would you rape someone to save the world? I would not.

Wasn’t this a Spider Robinson short story?

If that’s how you rationalize it, more power to ya’.
Maybe the ugly one really wants to get laid?

And if the hot one is above what you’re used to getting, it wouldn’t be unreasonable to assume she doesn’t really want to have sex with you.

It wouldn’t seem that much like rape if you had a conversation first like this

ME. “apparently if we have sex, it will save the world, what should we do?”

ATTRACTIVE WOMAN “I think we should do it. At least ypu seem nice”

And the world is saved. Did I really commit rape?

ETA. I hope not, cause that approach really works in bars.