sex and the left

joanna bujes joanna.bujes at ebay.sun.com
Wed Oct 23 19:56:35 PDT 2002


At 12:17 AM 10/23/2002 -0400, Kelly wrote:
>no joanna, please answer the question. why is someone's integrity and
>sensibility is even an issue worthy of bring up if they trade their skillz
>at hummers for cash or pony up their cash for a hummer when it is NOT an
>issue when we are talking about someone choosing to take a job as a plumber
>or to hire a plumber. we can wax eloquently about programmers' creativity
>even in the face of a shite class society that sucks the life out of em and
>not worry one whit about their integrity or sensibility for choosing to
>work they chose, but we need to worry about prostitutes and the people who
>frequent them.

I don't know what "hummer" means, but in the context of this discussion, I'll assume it has something to do with sex. Formally, there's no difference between selling your brain (as I do every day) and selling sexual services. Marx began an essay on money and alienated labor by writing "Money is the pimp between man and the object of his desire." He saw the parallels too. Historically, there is the difference that while we are all wage slaves, we do not all sell or buy sexual services, yet. In the context of this discussion my only argument was that prostitution was not a form of liberation for anybody.


>then there is the luscious rhetoric below: extremely effective? heh.
>delivered the goods. wake up. fantasy. ? this is because viewing porn can
>only be about objectification of the other. whereas REAL sex isn't, right?
>it's all fantasy otherwise. it's all about objectification. but somewhere
>out there is some special realm of sex where objectification is absent. or,
>at least, this is possible. isn't that what you think?

I said that sex requires two free subjects. Beyond that I'll say no more because, pretty obviously our experience with sex...or rather, our interpretation of the same lacks any common grounds.


>when you suggest someone's integrity and sensibility is at stake if they
>view pornography or hire a prostitute, yeah, i think that's a lofty
>position. in the context of other comments you've made, such as the shallow
>sad lives lead by gay men who frequent glory holes for anonymous sex, i
>don't think i'm going out on a limb.

I don't actually remember saying anything about gay men, but I'll take your word for it. As for pornography and prostitution, again, to each his/her own. But if someone makes the argument that these two activities are liberating, I want to know how that might be...


>i don't know what planet you have sex on but from what you've typed about
>men here you do indeed objectify them. you have never mentioned wanting to
>be desired, but i guess it would offend you if a lover got wet when she saw
>you sitting in a sunroom and got turned on by the way the sunbeams cascaded
>over your hair. or the way your ass looks when you bend over to get the SOS
>pads.

What does my being desired have to do with objectification? Why would I be offended if my lover got excited by my presence?

Joanna



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list