>
> So, there's no difference between having sex for lust/love and having
> sex for money?
>
> ???
>
> Joanna
Of course there's a difference; we've socially created and maintained the difference. There's nothing "natural" about it. Sex for "love" is just as much a product of social relations as sex for money; or, to put it the other way round, both types of sex have been made possible by "human nature". We get tangled up in discussions about "human nature" time and again on LBO, and as far as I can tell, the term is just about as useful as "luminiferous aether" or "phlogiston". I think it's much more helpful to leave it aside and analyze how social relations produce the society we live in (a Marxist point through and through, I want to stress to CB!).
Miles