For this debate, I'm going to argue the point that it is possible to get back your virginity after you lost it if you lost it by paying for it. I can't say that I will believe my arguments here 100% but that's got to be close to it. I welcome anyone who would like to accept my challenge to argue this topic.
I am going to go much by much of the same rules as Philochristos here and expect this to be a full head-on debate where my opponent will challenge my argument(s) by (attempting to) point out flaws in my reasoning and sequencing of miniarguments to defend my position.
The virginity of a person does not regard the means by which a person lost it.
Should a female dog be sold to a breeder, and then provides puppies a few months after its first sexual encounter it is fair to state that the female dog is no longer a virgin.
I must say that the same applies with humans. If a person pays for sexual intercourse, the financial means by which the person had sex for the first time is irrelevant. The same occurs if that person was paid to have someone have sex with them.
Thank you CopperRoses for accepting this debate. May it be ever fruitful. I am realizing now that I probably should have made this debate 5 rounds but we can worry about that later. For the record, I'm not contending the notion that once a person has sex for the first time they are no longer a virgin, regardless of whether they paid for it to be taken away or not. However, I am contending the notion that it's impossible to get back your virginity no matter in which way you've lost it. Paying for sex means that you're exchanging money for the service of sexual intercourse, specifically, in this case, for your virginity to be taken from you. Since you've paid for your virginity to be taken from you it is possible, at least in the theoretical sense, that later on you can obtain a refund. How? By having sex again with the exact same person (the escort) but in a reversed position from the first time. i.e. if you were on top the first time around then she would have to be on top the second time, etc.
To finalize the recapture of virginity, the escort would have to give you back the exact amount that you paid her for the first time of sexual intercourse during the actual act the second time.
I must point out the flaws in my opponent's argument and logic, here. The concept of ownership, and the loss of one's first time (aka virginity) are two different subjects that cannot be assessed as being the same. In theory, we own our personal items. A tribe may stick their spear in the land and grunt "This. Mine" before another tribe comes along and takes over. One might compare this to modern politics. However, virginity is a different concept. Sex is the only means by which a person may lose their virginity. Having sex in the "opposite position, and asking for a refund" is illogical. I must ask if my opponent is taking this debate as a joke.
Thank you for replying to my argument. It would be true to say that the concept of ownership and loss of one's virginity cannot be assessed as being the same if we were speaking outside of the context of the notion of exchanging money for the service of sexual intercourse. You COULD say that one doesn't OWN their virginity but it would incorrect to say that, if one is a virgin, that their virginity doesn't belong to them. This is because within the context of the notion of exchanging money for the service of sexual intercourse, specifically, from the perspective of the individual, for someone to take their virginity away from them, the individual has direct governance over their personal right to choose as to whether this is something that's in their best interest. They COULD choose to pay an escort for the service of sexual intercourse, specifically for their virginity to be taken from them, or they COULD choose to remain patient and actively pursue a better opportunity and subsequent mutual agreement. Having sex again and in the opposite position and expecting to receive a refund isn't illogical because within this context this isn't merely having sex again with the exact same person but just in the opposite position. Rather this constitutes a direct refund for that which has originally been paid for to be taken away since the return of the money which has been paid for that to take place would happen during the course of the sexual act: the second time with the exact same person (the escort) and in the opposite position (for the obvious reason) along with a reversed slightly dominant-slightly submissive role dynamic (i.e. if the individual was doing the thrusting the first time around then the escort would be the one doing the thrusting the second time around).