inascaldingjoy:

is not that sex is wrong and bad and all that shit.

But I have qualms about hearing or condoning things like this because socialists/Marxists tend to describe capitalism as an economic system where everything is for sale. A big focal point for Marxist theory is the idea that the economic theory of capitalism was ripe for class division and exploitation like never before at the point where labor became for sale. At the point that labor becomes for sale, people doing work are not treated like human beings breaking their backs, particularly if they are manual or unskilled workers, or in the working class; they become treated like means to an end, like expendable resources in this rat race to infinite growth and expansion for the bosses.

Idk, there was something that always irked me about that. The fact that we can maintain some sort of dissonance from the work someone does and the body someone is, and the fact that we treat that potential to do work as a commodity or something, and price it, and treat it as expendable, and subject the body attached to it to objectionable conditions and demonize the body and all the other bodies in that labor group. This irks me.

Sometimes I view privileged women engaging in sex work as part of that capitalist mentality. Some things should not be for sale, our bodies are one of them. And I do not know where capitalism comes into this situation and where feminism comes in.

It’s like that call girl lady who is going around doing interviews these days, she makes me really disgusted. She says idiotic things like, men are biologically programmed to cheat, and monogamous men are the heros, cheaters are normal people. She says she would have sex with rich men for 10k a week, men who were usually married. And she affirms this as a good thing, use your body to get ahead in life.

I’m not against this, though, in principle and in action. I support the right of Sports Illustrated models to wear bikinis so I can oggle how hot they are- and so they can affirm their sexual identities. I support the right of a lower working class woman to engage in sex work to feed her family, and believe that she should be able to get condoms and STD tests and health care.

But my qualm about the ForbesWomen article saying, use your body and your sexuality to get ahead in the corporate world, is just that, THE CORPORATE WORLD.

I cannot condone something that exists in such a privileged space, and such an oppressive space. To me that says, sell your body, because nothing is sacred in capitalism, and use it to buy fancy purses and stupid shit so you can be another cog in the raging imperialist machine.

And the point should be to resist that cog. The point is that fucking your co-worker will screw alot of shit up because cis het men in the corporate world tend to be jackasses. You could get assaulted and not get justice. You could lose your job, you could find that you slept with that asshole just to get a paycut or some shit.

The intersectionality of capitalism and EVERY OPPRESSION is important to articulate. At what point is a rich white woman becoming a prostitute to buy into the world of what capitalist societies dictate good/bad/right/wrong and at what point is she doing it without all those nasty implications and consequences?

If you engage in sex work to play into capitalism then I would not respect you.

IDK. Anyone think this makes sense?

It kind of makes sense, except I think where i disagree is with your “should”. Capitalism does not recognise “should” because it has no moral basis.  We “should” not buy goods produced under sweatshop conditions; we “should” resist our elevation at the expense of another; but we do.  We allow ourselves to be packaged, bought and sold every time we become part of the audience for an advertising-supported medium.  In strict Marxist terms, your privileged women, surely, are doing no different?