Thursday, August 24, 2006
I promised I'd reply to Jo's comment so here we go:
The society we live in functions by keeping sexism alive and well. Radfems seek to change this. Discussing the individual's right to prostitute themselves is at best irrelevant to our aim.
If/when we do live in an equal society, when the Patriarchy ceases to exist, then it would be worth examining the benefits or otherwise of prostitution as a career choice.
Until then the focus needs to be on eliminating the oppression of women, children and some men, and one of the manifestations of this oppression is prostitution.
So, eliminating prostitution is part of a wider program to eliminate oppression and bring about an equal society. I can understand how that makes sense.
And I'd be a total monster if I didn't want to eliminate oppression and bring about an equal society.
I wonder if prostitution in its current form would persist post-Patriarchy. No Patriarchy = no patriarchs, right? No male privilege to cater to? No male entitlement to satisfy? No demanding dicks to suck in exchange for currency? Liberated from The Patriarchy, would a man even consider the thought of contaminating a woman's sacred bodytemple with his dirty money, to satisfy his selfish and anti-social needs?
Maybe the institution of prostitution is not a cause of Patriarchy, but is symptomatic of, or maybe parasitic to, the institution of Patriarchy (such as exists). Without a systemic sense of male entitlement to satisfy, the whole male-entitlement-satisfaction industry would collapse. But I'm not sure that eliminating the male-entitlement-satisfaction industry would do much to eliminate the pre-existing sense of male entitlement (such as exists).
So I wonder if thinking that the elimination of prostitution will help make Patriarchy disappear is a type of magical thinking, similar to thinking that taking cough syrup will help cure pneumonia.
But this whole chicken-egg word game doesn't really address the reality of daily life for those women who exchange sexual activity for money, whose circumstances and opinions are as widely varied as the women themselves. Neither does it address the situation of people who think that those women who do barter sexual activity make life just a little harder for those women who don't.
But I'm still thinking, Jo.
The society we live in functions by keeping sexism alive and well. Radfems seek to change this. Discussing the individual's right to prostitute themselves is at best irrelevant to our aim.
If/when we do live in an equal society, when the Patriarchy ceases to exist, then it would be worth examining the benefits or otherwise of prostitution as a career choice.
Until then the focus needs to be on eliminating the oppression of women, children and some men, and one of the manifestations of this oppression is prostitution.
So, eliminating prostitution is part of a wider program to eliminate oppression and bring about an equal society. I can understand how that makes sense.
And I'd be a total monster if I didn't want to eliminate oppression and bring about an equal society.
I wonder if prostitution in its current form would persist post-Patriarchy. No Patriarchy = no patriarchs, right? No male privilege to cater to? No male entitlement to satisfy? No demanding dicks to suck in exchange for currency? Liberated from The Patriarchy, would a man even consider the thought of contaminating a woman's sacred bodytemple with his dirty money, to satisfy his selfish and anti-social needs?
Maybe the institution of prostitution is not a cause of Patriarchy, but is symptomatic of, or maybe parasitic to, the institution of Patriarchy (such as exists). Without a systemic sense of male entitlement to satisfy, the whole male-entitlement-satisfaction industry would collapse. But I'm not sure that eliminating the male-entitlement-satisfaction industry would do much to eliminate the pre-existing sense of male entitlement (such as exists).
So I wonder if thinking that the elimination of prostitution will help make Patriarchy disappear is a type of magical thinking, similar to thinking that taking cough syrup will help cure pneumonia.
But this whole chicken-egg word game doesn't really address the reality of daily life for those women who exchange sexual activity for money, whose circumstances and opinions are as widely varied as the women themselves. Neither does it address the situation of people who think that those women who do barter sexual activity make life just a little harder for those women who don't.
But I'm still thinking, Jo.
# posted by antiprincess @ 6:06 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
Bitch|Lab - thanks for commenting. I admit I am really out of my depth when it comes to class analysis so I appreciate your perspective and knowledge.
and if being part of this movement means renouncing any involvement in sex work, then you set up a whole alternative sub-culture, one that increasingly grows in its power to create norms and punishments for those who violate them.
can you say more about that?
and if being part of this movement means renouncing any involvement in sex work, then you set up a whole alternative sub-culture, one that increasingly grows in its power to create norms and punishments for those who violate them.
can you say more about that?
here's where i catch. Sacred body/temple.
Now, where I do believe in the human right to self-determination does have bodily and incarnate ramifications...i get nervious about labeling the genitals as the most important entrance to the human body/temple thingy.
it's a tough place. How do i maintain that rape and sexual assault is a particularly heinous means of oppressing women, and then turn around and not validate the "special flower" model of vigin-revering/slut-shaming sexual thought? i'm still trying to work that one out, and i think when i do...this pr0nstitution debate is gonna make a whole lot more sense. Not holding my breath for that, tho.
"one that increasingly grows in its power to create norms and punishments for those who violate them."
Step 1: Shaming folks on feminist blogosphere.
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Profit!/Utopia!
Snark off...i do actually agree with you, in that as movements gain power, they develop systems of internal regulation, but i also don't see how this thing gets off the ground.
i'm not such a hard and fast realist that i don't actually kind of pine for the Twistolution to happen (all things being equal, i think i'd welcome our new overladies, if that's the word), but i get real stuck on trying to figure out where the connection is between theoretical expressions of radfem and realization. And then someone gets impatient, and cozies up to Big Brother State Power.
Are we stuck?
Now, where I do believe in the human right to self-determination does have bodily and incarnate ramifications...i get nervious about labeling the genitals as the most important entrance to the human body/temple thingy.
it's a tough place. How do i maintain that rape and sexual assault is a particularly heinous means of oppressing women, and then turn around and not validate the "special flower" model of vigin-revering/slut-shaming sexual thought? i'm still trying to work that one out, and i think when i do...this pr0nstitution debate is gonna make a whole lot more sense. Not holding my breath for that, tho.
"one that increasingly grows in its power to create norms and punishments for those who violate them."
Step 1: Shaming folks on feminist blogosphere.
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Profit!/Utopia!
Snark off...i do actually agree with you, in that as movements gain power, they develop systems of internal regulation, but i also don't see how this thing gets off the ground.
i'm not such a hard and fast realist that i don't actually kind of pine for the Twistolution to happen (all things being equal, i think i'd welcome our new overladies, if that's the word), but i get real stuck on trying to figure out where the connection is between theoretical expressions of radfem and realization. And then someone gets impatient, and cozies up to Big Brother State Power.
Are we stuck?
Maybe I just have less patience lately, but reading your blog post made me want to punch somebody. And, hint: the "somebody" isn't you, AP.
sly - once upon a time I read a really great book entitled How to Stay Out of the Gynecologist's Office. (sadly, now out of print.)
One of the authors (maybe Carol Downer...maybe I'm wrong) wrote words to the effect of "the vagina is about as internal an organ as a mouth."
Reading that (or what I believe I read, at any rate) revolutionized how I felt about women's bodies and their politics.
the heavenly gates, as it were, came tumbling down.
One of the authors (maybe Carol Downer...maybe I'm wrong) wrote words to the effect of "the vagina is about as internal an organ as a mouth."
Reading that (or what I believe I read, at any rate) revolutionized how I felt about women's bodies and their politics.
the heavenly gates, as it were, came tumbling down.
I wish I could think of something to say to this, but I can't. I think sex work, in one way or another, will always be around. I am sure, post patriarchy, it would be hugely, vastly different... perhaps far more an expression of mutual eroticism or art, an expression of an equal enjoyment of one anothers bodies, entered into fully by choice and not truly out of monitary needs...but it would still be around.
Huh, I guess that counts as something.
Huh, I guess that counts as something.
...or it could go the other way and become even more deumanize and dangerous and seedy, some sort of outlaw subculture thing brought about by backlash and maintained by men (& women) who do not like the 'new world order'...
is prostitution a consequence of, or a parasite of, The Patriarchy?
that is, did it arise out of male entitlement, or did it evolve to take advantage of the FICTION of male entitlement?
that is, did it arise out of male entitlement, or did it evolve to take advantage of the FICTION of male entitlement?
I also wonder about the connection between male entitlement and prostitution. I'm not sure it's necessarily the case that if we get rid of one, the other will dissipate. I'm still stuck on a massage analogy. If I'm dying for a massage, and can't convince my lover to soothe me, I'll pay for it. Am I exhibiting some kind of entitlement by exchanging cash for a physically pleasurable service?
Is it possible, post-patriarchy, or even now, for a woman to exchange sex for cash from a man as a fair trade? If I trade a back-rub for a blow-job with my guy, am I being exploited?
Personally, I think fair trade prostitution is possible, but necessitates better facilities for children and teens in crisis, and social services sufficient to eradicate poverty. In a society in which poverty is a historical tragedy we shake our heads at, will we still have a sex trade?
Is it possible, post-patriarchy, or even now, for a woman to exchange sex for cash from a man as a fair trade? If I trade a back-rub for a blow-job with my guy, am I being exploited?
Personally, I think fair trade prostitution is possible, but necessitates better facilities for children and teens in crisis, and social services sufficient to eradicate poverty. In a society in which poverty is a historical tragedy we shake our heads at, will we still have a sex trade?
Sage:
"In a society in which poverty is a historical tragedy we shake our heads at, will we still have a sex trade?"
I think so, not all women are totally in it for the money.
"In a society in which poverty is a historical tragedy we shake our heads at, will we still have a sex trade?"
I think so, not all women are totally in it for the money.
but why would prostitution (sex in trade for something else of value) arise in the wake of male entitlement?
why would male entitlement stop, find its wallet, count out money, and then resume? why would my entitlement simply not TAKE what it wants?
if one is entitled, that implies that one need give nothing in return. clearly, in the case of prostitution, there is an exchange going on.
I suppose a real sticky wicket in all this is the presence of some third party taking money that rightly belongs to the one who earned it.
why would male entitlement stop, find its wallet, count out money, and then resume? why would my entitlement simply not TAKE what it wants?
if one is entitled, that implies that one need give nothing in return. clearly, in the case of prostitution, there is an exchange going on.
I suppose a real sticky wicket in all this is the presence of some third party taking money that rightly belongs to the one who earned it.
I can't address the post-Patriarchy part, since I find "Patriarchy" itself such a nebulous concept. But I do think that as long as there's any kind of money economy (or even any kind of commodity economy), prostitution is going to happen. Even given full economic and legal equality for women, as long as there's any kind of trade in goods and services, its going to occur to at least a few people that its easier/more enjoyable to trade in some form of sex rather than some other good or service.
That's the supply end – the demand end takes care of itself. The idea that there would be an end to a demand requires one to believe in a utopia where either 1) anyone is sexually available to anyone else to begin with (a kind of "Big Sex Candy Mountain"?) or 2) people are so inherently happy with the sexual choices available to them that they're never going to desire people unavailable to them – people will all get over "looksism" and hence not have desires for a rare good-looking other who has no interest in them, the old will never want to get onto the young, and nobody ends up alone. Or 3) people feel all the same desires they do today but would be shame, Shame, SHAMED at the very thought of bartering money for sex and hence just wouldn't even try to buy sex.
I don't see 1 happening, plus it has a big downside – having to play with anybody who wanted a piece of your candy might not be much fun. Number 2 I think is the outcome a lot of people are wishing for, but I don't see that happening either – I think there will always be some people who for various reasons are considered more attractive than others and always people wanting others they can't have. Add trade in money or commodities to that mix and guess what emerges from that naturally. And 3, well, when it comes to controlling sexual behavior, shame seems to be better at promoting hypocrisy than anything, not to mention the side effects of guilt and shaming.
That's the supply end – the demand end takes care of itself. The idea that there would be an end to a demand requires one to believe in a utopia where either 1) anyone is sexually available to anyone else to begin with (a kind of "Big Sex Candy Mountain"?) or 2) people are so inherently happy with the sexual choices available to them that they're never going to desire people unavailable to them – people will all get over "looksism" and hence not have desires for a rare good-looking other who has no interest in them, the old will never want to get onto the young, and nobody ends up alone. Or 3) people feel all the same desires they do today but would be shame, Shame, SHAMED at the very thought of bartering money for sex and hence just wouldn't even try to buy sex.
I don't see 1 happening, plus it has a big downside – having to play with anybody who wanted a piece of your candy might not be much fun. Number 2 I think is the outcome a lot of people are wishing for, but I don't see that happening either – I think there will always be some people who for various reasons are considered more attractive than others and always people wanting others they can't have. Add trade in money or commodities to that mix and guess what emerges from that naturally. And 3, well, when it comes to controlling sexual behavior, shame seems to be better at promoting hypocrisy than anything, not to mention the side effects of guilt and shaming.
I don't work with the concept of patriarchy, but I do work with the concept of class.
If there's a socialist revolution, in which the working class genuinely takes power and keeps it, then I imagine prostitution, as such, will fade away, as the class system is dismantled. In a socialist society, there'd be prostitution, as there are other forms of work, but the worst abuses would be eliminated, as society is reorganized so that no one is exploited, and working conditions for everyone are improved.
Ultimately, in a truly classless society, in which there's abundance and no one must do anything they really don't want to do, there would doubtless be people who enjoy having sex with lots of people and are especially skilled at it, but they wouldn't be prostitutes, any more than a gardener is a field slave.
That's the long term goal, anyway. In the meantime, the first principle of Marxism is that workers have to liberate themselves, which means that it's up to prostitutes, first and foremost, to say what their own interests are.
If there's a socialist revolution, in which the working class genuinely takes power and keeps it, then I imagine prostitution, as such, will fade away, as the class system is dismantled. In a socialist society, there'd be prostitution, as there are other forms of work, but the worst abuses would be eliminated, as society is reorganized so that no one is exploited, and working conditions for everyone are improved.
Ultimately, in a truly classless society, in which there's abundance and no one must do anything they really don't want to do, there would doubtless be people who enjoy having sex with lots of people and are especially skilled at it, but they wouldn't be prostitutes, any more than a gardener is a field slave.
That's the long term goal, anyway. In the meantime, the first principle of Marxism is that workers have to liberate themselves, which means that it's up to prostitutes, first and foremost, to say what their own interests are.
I'm not a Marxist, but I am down with that analysis for this, at least.
and I think the notion of the "sacred whore" is really worth looking at more closely, even if it doesn't reflect the reality of most actual prostitutes' work.
I do know some for whom it -does;- it's rather remarkable. I can't help but think it's at least -potentially- a lot more valuable and fulfilling and meaningful work than I don't know becoming a midlevel managerial cog in another overpriced useless widget-producing/selling institution.
and I think the notion of the "sacred whore" is really worth looking at more closely, even if it doesn't reflect the reality of most actual prostitutes' work.
I do know some for whom it -does;- it's rather remarkable. I can't help but think it's at least -potentially- a lot more valuable and fulfilling and meaningful work than I don't know becoming a midlevel managerial cog in another overpriced useless widget-producing/selling institution.
It really has little to with patriarchy or male entitlement, the reasons why a lot of men pay for sex these days. Often they are simply lonely and have trouble forming relationships. Prostitution may historically be linked to patriarchy (see Engels) but in it's modern form it has more to do with social alienation than anything else.
and I think the notion of the "sacred whore" is really worth looking at more closely, even if it doesn't reflect the reality of most actual prostitutes' work.
I wonder why it looks like no one has ever said "hey, happy hooker, what makes you so happy?" and tried to see if any part of that answer is generalizable to the vast throbbing multitude of miserable prostitutes. I think some real progress could come out of that discussion.
Post a Comment
I wonder why it looks like no one has ever said "hey, happy hooker, what makes you so happy?" and tried to see if any part of that answer is generalizable to the vast throbbing multitude of miserable prostitutes. I think some real progress could come out of that discussion.
<< Home
