CK, here is a comment you made in response to someone else in this thread. My thoughts are below.

"But it is something that has been somewhat normalised - I dont know if it’s going to be shocking in the future. So many people, not only girls, exchange sexual content for money nowadays. She went some steps further but.. too far from where we already are as a society?"

The extent to which this is "normalised" is in part, I think, a function of the ability of someone like Lily to reach a wider audience through social media. Think of what she did as sort of a carnival side show act coupled with a not entirely novel way of making a large amount of money quickly. I see this as creating an economy of scale in the entertainment industry through a fairly tawdry display of exhibitionism. A man might be willing to pay say $500 to have sex with her but by taking on a 100 men for free she creates a situation where 10,000 men are willing to chip in $10 each for the show. A show to which they do not have to travel, merely open their phones or other electronic devices. That is the part that is now normalized, long distance voyeurism.

She probably also suffered some trauma as a result of pushing herself further than she was actually comfortable. And this may have come as a surprise to her as her motivation was undoubtedly to build her 'brand', make money and expand her client base.

I would like to point out that "competitive sexual display" like this is not a new phenomenon. If Suetonius is to be believed the Empress Messalina once challenged the top prostitute in Rome to a contest to see who could shag the most men in a day. The Empress is reputed to have won and driven her rival in ars amatoria from the field.