At 05:00 PM 2/27/2011, Miles Jackson wrote:
>123hop at comcast.net wrote:
>
>>Sigh.
>>As to my attempt at humor. I was trying to be sympathetic to the
>>boys. As a bisexual woman, I certainly understand the attraction of
>>breasts.
>>But the topic of the original post was about the commodification of
>>breast milk and the exploitation of the women who would have to
>>provide it.
>>But, apparently the breast imagery was so overpowering, that the
>>males on this list who chose to respond could not see commodification
>>or exploitation -- or anything much other than Breasts.
>
>With some trepidation, I'll wade into this, because I do have something to
>say that doesn't involve Breasts. Yes, the commodification of breast milk
>and the exploitation of women is beyond the pale. So is the
>commodification of coal and the exploitation of miners. So is the
>commodification of cars and the exploitation of auto workers. The
>fundamental problem of capitalist society is the commodification of
>life. When we make explicit or implicit judgments about how some products
>of social activity are particularly gruesome to commodify--e.g., breast
>milk, sex--we are inadvertently reinforcing the notion that there are
>other aspects of social life that are reasonable and acceptable to
>commodify. That's why I challenge the idea that there is a fundamental
>difference between the commodification of breast milk and the
>commodification of cars or education or health care. I do not want to
>live in a world where there are little, special islands of human activity
>isolated from the commodity system; I want to live in a world where there
>are no commodities at all.
>
>I recognize that's the grandiose statement, but I think it's good to be
>grandiose in these dark times.
>
>Miles
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
-- http://cleandraws.com Wear Clean Draws ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)