Trusted, Automoderated users
25,837
edits
Women As Sex Vendors (book): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
'''Women As Sex Vendors - or, Why Women Are Conservative (Being a View of the Economic - Status of Woman)''' is a book written in 1918 that argues that women have a monopoly on a human need (sex) and that this makes virtually all women more economically/socially privileged than men and also makes women members of the counter-revolutionary class in regards to socialism. In other words, the book describes virtually all women as bourgeois. The book is notable in that it was written by a prominent female socialist and contains a number of arguments about present day sexual dynamics that virtually no prominent Western socialists today would argue were ever true. The book is less powerful in its description of the psychology behind sexual choice and possible solutions to modern sexual dynamics. | '''Women As Sex Vendors - or, Why Women Are Conservative (Being a View of the Economic - Status of Woman)''' is a book written in 1918 that argues that women have a monopoly on a human need (sex) and that this makes virtually all women more economically/socially privileged than men and also makes women members of the counter-revolutionary class in regards to socialism. In other words, the book describes virtually all women as bourgeois. The book is notable in that it was written by a prominent female socialist and contains a number of arguments about present day sexual dynamics that virtually no prominent Western socialists today would argue were ever true. The book is less powerful in its description of the psychology behind sexual choice and possible solutions to modern sexual dynamics. | ||
Contrary to some evolutionary psychologists who see natural sexual impulses as driving women to want resource security from men, the book argues that it is mainly the economic system that drives women to want economic security from men. The book suggests that sexual desire plays little to no role in women demanding resources for sex (which is well... false), and that a post-capitalist society would positively transform relationships by ending the role of material ownership in sexual relations. The book sees social status (meritocracy through socialism) as a better sorter of mating success than non-meritocratic ownership of material goods. The book however, does not go into how men bartering with social status in a socialist meritocracy is not a barter, nor how a meritocratic market socialism would end bartering based on material resources. | Contrary to some evolutionary psychologists who see natural sexual impulses as driving women to want resource security from men, the book argues that it is mainly the economic system that drives women to want economic security from men. The book suggests that sexual desire plays little to no role in women demanding resources for sex (which is well... false), and that a post-capitalist society would positively transform relationships by ending the role of material ownership in sexual relations. The book sees social status (meritocracy through socialism) as a better sorter of mating success than non-meritocratic ownership of material goods. The book however, does not go into how men bartering with social status in a socialist meritocracy is not a barter, nor how a meritocratic market socialism would end bartering for based on material resources. | ||
The book argues that capitalism pushes women to exercise a naturally privileged economic position to avoid homelessness and to create more labor power through her offspring. The book explicitly anticipated the enormous money transfer from men to women - not just because of feminism - but because of the female monopoly on sexual access, which they collectively utilize to extract resources from men. | The book argues that capitalism pushes women to exercise a naturally privileged economic position to avoid homelessness and to create more labor power through her offspring. The book explicitly anticipated the enormous money transfer from men to women - not just because of feminism - but because of the female monopoly on sexual access, which they collectively utilize to extract resources from men. | ||