Coulter gets enough press, but I feel justified in adding more to the pile of negative attention since she's such a moron. My premise: a conversation she had on some talkshow where she said that Bill Clinton's predisposition to call 'anything in a skirt sexy' showed some 'latent homosexuality'.
My second premise: since Coulter was invited to speak for the CPAC (the largest 'outside government' republican group) and she assented she in some what must answer for her fellow party members.
The predisposition to which Ann refers is likely to be similar to that of The Todd in Scrubs, where his heterosexuality (until season five-ish) is so overt and exagerrated that it borders on homophobia, which is Freudian defense-mechanism-speak for 'latent homosexuality', which I can understand. Ann need look no further than her own party lines. The one who is affectionately known as Pastor Ted, who solicited sexual favours from a gay escort dude, had a regular conference call with his protegé, George Bush. Not long after, another Evangelic priest was discharged for the same thing. How many of the Catholic Right have forgotten the priest scandals of only a few years ago? This is latent homosexuality if ever there were such a thing.
And now we have Coulter calling Edwards a faggot on national television. This kind of hostile insecurity (a 'schoolyard taunt', she would later call it) is more likely a sign of homophobia, a pre-expressive phase of homosexuality. Her humour is sophomoric, as what's his face said during her interview with FOX News (surprise!).
Coulter is convinced that because she and her 'base' have withstood these kind of things before she will hold up to them in the future, but has she never heard of the straw that break the camel's back? People who think George Bush is in the same boat should see his approval ratings or, failing that, the midterm elections of 2006. Coulter cannot keep this up, and I hope this expresses itself in 2008.
March 7, 2007
March 1, 2007
Prostitution, Patriarchy and Capitalism
At first glance capitalism today seems to be a rampantly patriarchal institution. In the United States prostitution dominates sexuality and damns women to lives of shame and horrible abuse. Women are forced to have sex for survival and are alienated from society. Globalization creates problems in nearly every corner of the earth. On top of a callous disregard for the environment, it has created horrible economic imbalances in third world countries. All this appears to be conducted in the spirit of collecting the most capital. Analysis, however, reveals a structure of patriarchy supporting and encouraging the mistreatment of millions of humans, using capitalism merely as another tool of exploitation.
When Emma Goldman wrote her essays on the connection between patriarchy and capitalism, the state of American society and economy was very different than today. Chief among these short pieces is “The Traffic in Women.” Writing in 1917, Goldman was witness to a society that was the cause of gross oppression to women. Over the following decades the maturation of society and the consequential economic changes have moved to decrease prostitution and encourage social equality in America. Prevailing patriarchal attitudes toward women and globalization, however, have fought to resist these improvements for women.
Today, patriarchy and capitalism still stand together. Jean Enriquez explores this mistreatment of women for money in “Globalization, Militarism and Sex Trafficking.” Her essay draws striking parallels to Goldman’s from eighty-nine years earlier. Both authors recognize that sex dominates society, and agree that a great number of men visit prostitutes frequently. Goldman openly states that upwards of one half of married men visit prostitutes, while financial data from Enriquez suggests a lower figure for most countries. She says that modernization has done little to curtail the spread of prostitution, insisting that quite the opposite has happened, as global trade has been bent to ease the sale of women.
Prostitution is an enormously profitable industry. Yet, despite the large flow of money, most women can barely afford to stay alive. According to Enriquez, most women involved in sex trafficking do not continue to do so by choice. They are forced to submit themselves, to take drugs, to be mutilated and are prevented from leaving. She notes that it is the pimps or managers or owners who benefit from the system. Yet, mistreatment and financial exploitation is just the beginning. The women are held with such low regard that they are effectively excluded from society. Their work effectively stripes them of their humanity and considers them a machine for sexual pleasure. A prostitute represents the ultimate example of objectifying women. Despite being so downtrodden, they are made to believe that their sexual exploits are empowering. Enriquez notes the paradox of being downtrodden yet empowered for a single action in her essay. This double standard is only the beginning of a justification made for continued prostitution.
In addition to being mistreated in nearly every way possible, the very nature of prostitution is destructive the women involved. Since these women are forced into their sexual encounters and submit for an ultimate means that is not pleasure or love or reproduction or any reasonable ends to result from intercourse, they are alienated from sex. As Marx notes in his Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, performing any labor to satisfy an external means disconnects the laborer from the process and products of the labor. The act of submitting to a man for sex is, to these women, thus a method purely for survival, devoid of any pleasure. Clearly, a sexual experience should not lack pleasure, nor should it satisfy any means external to itself. Perhaps even more criminally than their treatment, women in prostitution are stripped of the ability and desire to have meaningful sexual relationships.
It would seem that no modern society with any regard for humans or a sense of right and wrong would stand for such horrible mistreatment. But prostitution runs rampant in modern times. And why is this? Men, in short. More accurately, it is the views perpetuated by patriarchy in society that justify prostitution. Women are cast aside and it is assumed they chose their fate, or their torment is overlooked and masked with rhetoric. Goldman notes that no little girl dreams to grow up to be a prostitute. While she may have been writing some time ago, it is clear that this is true still today. Quite understandably, no little girl desires a life of torture and exploitation (nor does any human for that matter). According to Goldman, no woman chooses such a fate, but is rather forced into it by prevailing economic factors and societal predispositions. On page 179 she observes, “The economic and social inferiority of women is responsible for prostitution.” She concludes later that this economic inequality is caused by underlying social inequality. Primarily, it is perceived inferiority to men that keeps women from getting jobs that allow them to be self sufficient that forces women to prostitution.
Coupling prostitution’s persistence prior to capitalism with Goldman’s conclusions that society is at fault leads to the conclusion that capitalism does not cause prostitution. If capitalism is not the cause of prostitution, can it be blamed for the current state of prostitution? Using Goldman’s essays as a benchmark to which modern prostitution data and capitalism are compared, one can conclude only that continued patriarchy is the cause for the resilience of prostitution. Capitalism plays an important role only in the spread and popularization of the sex trade abroad. More specifically, it is efforts to encourage free trade and globalization that force women into lives of prostitution.
Social movements since Goldman’s essays have progressed feminism and discouraged prostitution in America. In 1917 women were unable to vote legally, unable to have a self supporting career and less educated than men. The Nineteenth Amendment granted women the right to vote when it was ratified in 1920. This amendment, unlike previous amendments granting rights to non-white-men, was not sidestepped to deny women the right to vote. Following the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, women were (on paper) equal to men in the eyes of the government. Women are now able to hold better careers than in Goldman’s times. More importantly, women are able to be self sufficient and are able to distance themselves from dependence on men as a means of survival. As for education, recent figures suggest that women have a higher rate of enrollment in colleges than men. Among hundreds of other changes since Goldman, these three illustrate the drastic changes in women’s status over the past ninety years.
With great legal movements and trends in education and society in general women are very nearly equal to men in America. Salaries for women are very similar to those of men in the same job. Some jobs now show a distribution in favor of women. According to the National Science Foundation, differences between salaries for men and women in engineering are separated by negligible differences when compared correctly (Carlson). Representation of women in the federal government is greatly improved and ever increasing too. Society’s views toward women in politics have improved greatly with time. According to a USA Today/Gallup Poll, 92% of Americans would vote for a woman running for president. A poll conducted in 1937 revealed that a mere 33% of Americans would vote for a female commander in chief (Poll Reports). This is not to say that all women are universally regarded as being equal, but merely to make the point that women are in general regarded as political and economic equals to men in modern American Society.
Considering that women are for the most part equal to men economically, there surely must be little motivation for prostitution. This is clearly not the case. The reasons for prostitution have changed since Goldman composed “The Traffic in Women.” Goldman blames economic oppression and inequality woman turning to prostitution. While these reasons may be relevant today, there exists economic potential for women not present in 1917. Instead, most prostitutes today are stranded by their childhood experiences. Enriquez does not mention economic factors in her explaining the reasons for women entering into prostitution. Figures suggest that as many as 95% of prostitutes are victims of childhood sexual abuse. This mistreatment is often regarded to play a role in driving a woman to sell herself. “I am convinced on a daily basis that women’s engagement in prostitution are linked to their experiences of incestuous rape…to cultural pressures to be sexually available to men,” notes Enriquez on page three Childhood sexual abuse is without a doubt a result of male stereotypes perpetuated by patriarchy. Even though the reasons for entering into the sex trade having changed, the horrible situations endured have not.
Equality created in social movements of the twentieth century represents only economic and political equality. It is still expected in America that men are to be physically superior to women. Enriquez distills a disturbing truth about society’s expecting men to desire prostitution. She says, “It is about definitions of masculinity where men are given unbridled access and unquestioned ownership to women’s bodies. It is about myths of men’s uncontrollable urge and right to buy or rape women whenever they feel the urge. So even when there is no cash involved as in prostitution, there is rape”(3). If men and women were equal in all respects (as statistics suggest) men would not perceive a right to a woman’s body. Goldman too realizes this perceived and even encouraged superiority. She notes that men are expected to engage in many sexual experiences, while women confined to “celibacy or prostitution,” that is belonging to one or being shared by all. Thus, it is this assumed sexual dominance that has historically justified and continues to justify prostitution.
As noted earlier, no woman becomes or continues to be a prostitute by true free will. They are forced into dire situations by economic constraints or societal pressures. Today, statistics suggest that child abuse plays a very large role in women turning to prostitution. Patriarchy is responsible for the sexual abuse of adolescents. Enriquez notes that women are also indoctrinated with the idea that allowing men access their bodies is empowering—another character of patriarchy. Thus, it is patriarchy that teaches that sexual exploitation is acceptable. Additionally, prevailing gender roles that justify men “needing” prostitutes. They are convinced that their sexual desires cannot be conquered by will alone and must be satisfied. By these two mechanisms, patriarchy provides the means and the motivation for rape to exist. Rape exists without capitalism, the addition of money merely changes its name to prostitution.
The exchange of money for sex exists external to the girl involved. According to Milton Friedman, exchanging money for goods or services implies consent and therefore choice among both parties. From that one may conclude that the women willingly agree to engage in sexual activity for money. But, they do not agree to do so, but rather are forced to accept money. According to Enriquez, most of the money goes to the pimps or managers. The Factbook on Global Sexual Exploitation provided by the University of Rhode Island offers disturbing insight regarding the relationship of pimps and prostitutes. In short, these women are forced by means of beating, psychological abuse and torture to pay their managers. When a woman accepts money in exchange for sex it is not for the sex that she receives the money, it is for safety from her pimp. There is no consent to sex in this process, only a desire for safety. The abuse of women by the pimps is clearly a patriarchal tendency. Turning again to the gender roles perpetuated by society, the pimp sees himself as dominant to the girls. In tern, he abuses and exploits them as he sees fit.
Even without a pimp, the woman does not fully consent to intercourse. When a woman relies on prostitution for survival she is forced to choose exploitation over death. In this way, prostitution is rape. If a man threatens a woman at gunpoint for sex the act is called rape. Yet, if a man gives the woman money it is called prostitution. Both are the same in that survival is the woman’s goal. Money merely happens to be the means of survival. A patriarchal society, even without personal property will have rape and prostitution. Prostitution exists solely as a product as patriarchy. Modern patriarchy creates the perceived need for prostitutes and forces women into prostitution. The woman does not engage in consensual sex and the process is thus not in the spirit of capitalism according to Milton Friedman. Even in the absence of a pimp women selling themselves is not an economic matter. Money is merely used as a means of survival, and sex as the tool to acquire money.
Movements toward foreign prostitution appear to be a trend motivated by economics. It is much cheaper to have sex with a woman from a country with a weak economy. Relaxed prostitution laws and uninformed child protection laws make it easier for men to hire as many women as they want. Enriquez explores foreign institutions of prostitution, finding that 4.4% of Korea’s economy comes from the sex trade. Sex tourism has recently become a popular, albeit underground, vacation for middle aged single men. German officials worry about prostitution shortages during World Cup events. It seems that prostitution is expanding and being popularized everywhere on earth.
Foreign success and profits in prostitution stem from society and globalization. Social movements in America have fought to discourage prostitution. Feminism taught society that women and men are equal, and made major steps in lessening economic factors that contribute to prostitution. Globalization has replicated throughout the third world the economic situations that drove women into prostitution in early twentieth century America. Goldman’s analysis of prostitution is thus applicable to many third world countries with factory based economies. Women are forced to be exploited in a factory, to sell their bodies or to starve. In countries like Thailand and the Philippines it is economically favorable to work as a prostitute than to work eighteen hour days in factories owned by multinational conglomerates. It is quite difficult to imagine a fate worse than prostitution, but working days on end in unsafe conditions, without sleep, for barely enough money to survive does come awfully close. Between existing patriarchal societies and economic situations imposed by globalization women are faced with more pressure for prostitution than in contemporary America.
Competition plays an important factor in the spread of foreign prostitution. According to Enriquez, it, “creates the pressure to ‘import’ younger and younger women from more ‘exotic’ backgrounds” (4). This demand does not come from the industry itself, but its customers. If one assumes that the market for women is not artificially stimulated then it can be concluded that there exists a genuine demand. The desire for “exotic” women stems from patriarchal predispositions. Friedman would attribute the popularity of the system not to the potential profits but to those who the industry attracts. In other words, profits develop as a response to demand. Capitalism thus merely reflects the desires of those who participate in it. While this may be a slightly optimistic view, it is safe to say that a market for prostitutes is not manipulated in the same manner that dominates the diamond market (that is to say there is a connection between those who purchase prostitutes and the institution itself). Because capitalism is merely adjusting with the will of the customer, it is those who use the prostitutes who are to blame for its spread.
Globalization aside, it is clearly patriarchal society that is responsible for prostitution’s spread in third world countries. Korea makes a great deal of money from the sex industry because its government fails to enforce its own laws. While the country does make a great deal of profit from allowing prostitution run rampant, it is the lack of regard for women’s rights that truly justifies the nation’s overlooking sex work. Any helping its citizens rather than attempting to profit is a good example of this. Today, the United States government spends billions of dollars each year to assist those who survive natural disasters. Prostitutes, like those in disaster zones, are virtually defenseless and lack the resources to improve their situation. Caring for the victims of a hurricane yields the same benefit to government and society as helping prostitutes escape their lives of torture. It is because of men not desire for wealth that these societies perceive a right to women’s bodies that they allow prostitution to continue. The mechanism is exactly the same as that which justifies the American sex trade.
Universally, patriarchy responsible for prostitution. Through gender roles reinforced by society men are convinced they have a right to a woman’s body. This, coupled with associated assumptions of female gender roles, creates a potential for rape. Merely placing money in the system renames rape prostitution. Because rape and by extension prostitution have nothing to do with economic superiority or growth it can be safely assumed that prostitution is not encouraged by capitalism alone. Capitalism plays a roll in encouraging such horrible treatment of women only through globalization in third world countries. Even then, it ultimately is patriarchy that takes advantage of the situation that women are forced into. While capitalism does manifest itself in other patriarchal ways, it finds little role in the core of prostitution. The abolishment of this harsh economic system will not bring female equality, since it certainly will not end prostitution and rape. Only through fighting against patriarchy can such abominations be ended.
When Emma Goldman wrote her essays on the connection between patriarchy and capitalism, the state of American society and economy was very different than today. Chief among these short pieces is “The Traffic in Women.” Writing in 1917, Goldman was witness to a society that was the cause of gross oppression to women. Over the following decades the maturation of society and the consequential economic changes have moved to decrease prostitution and encourage social equality in America. Prevailing patriarchal attitudes toward women and globalization, however, have fought to resist these improvements for women.
Today, patriarchy and capitalism still stand together. Jean Enriquez explores this mistreatment of women for money in “Globalization, Militarism and Sex Trafficking.” Her essay draws striking parallels to Goldman’s from eighty-nine years earlier. Both authors recognize that sex dominates society, and agree that a great number of men visit prostitutes frequently. Goldman openly states that upwards of one half of married men visit prostitutes, while financial data from Enriquez suggests a lower figure for most countries. She says that modernization has done little to curtail the spread of prostitution, insisting that quite the opposite has happened, as global trade has been bent to ease the sale of women.
Prostitution is an enormously profitable industry. Yet, despite the large flow of money, most women can barely afford to stay alive. According to Enriquez, most women involved in sex trafficking do not continue to do so by choice. They are forced to submit themselves, to take drugs, to be mutilated and are prevented from leaving. She notes that it is the pimps or managers or owners who benefit from the system. Yet, mistreatment and financial exploitation is just the beginning. The women are held with such low regard that they are effectively excluded from society. Their work effectively stripes them of their humanity and considers them a machine for sexual pleasure. A prostitute represents the ultimate example of objectifying women. Despite being so downtrodden, they are made to believe that their sexual exploits are empowering. Enriquez notes the paradox of being downtrodden yet empowered for a single action in her essay. This double standard is only the beginning of a justification made for continued prostitution.
In addition to being mistreated in nearly every way possible, the very nature of prostitution is destructive the women involved. Since these women are forced into their sexual encounters and submit for an ultimate means that is not pleasure or love or reproduction or any reasonable ends to result from intercourse, they are alienated from sex. As Marx notes in his Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, performing any labor to satisfy an external means disconnects the laborer from the process and products of the labor. The act of submitting to a man for sex is, to these women, thus a method purely for survival, devoid of any pleasure. Clearly, a sexual experience should not lack pleasure, nor should it satisfy any means external to itself. Perhaps even more criminally than their treatment, women in prostitution are stripped of the ability and desire to have meaningful sexual relationships.
It would seem that no modern society with any regard for humans or a sense of right and wrong would stand for such horrible mistreatment. But prostitution runs rampant in modern times. And why is this? Men, in short. More accurately, it is the views perpetuated by patriarchy in society that justify prostitution. Women are cast aside and it is assumed they chose their fate, or their torment is overlooked and masked with rhetoric. Goldman notes that no little girl dreams to grow up to be a prostitute. While she may have been writing some time ago, it is clear that this is true still today. Quite understandably, no little girl desires a life of torture and exploitation (nor does any human for that matter). According to Goldman, no woman chooses such a fate, but is rather forced into it by prevailing economic factors and societal predispositions. On page 179 she observes, “The economic and social inferiority of women is responsible for prostitution.” She concludes later that this economic inequality is caused by underlying social inequality. Primarily, it is perceived inferiority to men that keeps women from getting jobs that allow them to be self sufficient that forces women to prostitution.
Coupling prostitution’s persistence prior to capitalism with Goldman’s conclusions that society is at fault leads to the conclusion that capitalism does not cause prostitution. If capitalism is not the cause of prostitution, can it be blamed for the current state of prostitution? Using Goldman’s essays as a benchmark to which modern prostitution data and capitalism are compared, one can conclude only that continued patriarchy is the cause for the resilience of prostitution. Capitalism plays an important role only in the spread and popularization of the sex trade abroad. More specifically, it is efforts to encourage free trade and globalization that force women into lives of prostitution.
Social movements since Goldman’s essays have progressed feminism and discouraged prostitution in America. In 1917 women were unable to vote legally, unable to have a self supporting career and less educated than men. The Nineteenth Amendment granted women the right to vote when it was ratified in 1920. This amendment, unlike previous amendments granting rights to non-white-men, was not sidestepped to deny women the right to vote. Following the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, women were (on paper) equal to men in the eyes of the government. Women are now able to hold better careers than in Goldman’s times. More importantly, women are able to be self sufficient and are able to distance themselves from dependence on men as a means of survival. As for education, recent figures suggest that women have a higher rate of enrollment in colleges than men. Among hundreds of other changes since Goldman, these three illustrate the drastic changes in women’s status over the past ninety years.
With great legal movements and trends in education and society in general women are very nearly equal to men in America. Salaries for women are very similar to those of men in the same job. Some jobs now show a distribution in favor of women. According to the National Science Foundation, differences between salaries for men and women in engineering are separated by negligible differences when compared correctly (Carlson). Representation of women in the federal government is greatly improved and ever increasing too. Society’s views toward women in politics have improved greatly with time. According to a USA Today/Gallup Poll, 92% of Americans would vote for a woman running for president. A poll conducted in 1937 revealed that a mere 33% of Americans would vote for a female commander in chief (Poll Reports). This is not to say that all women are universally regarded as being equal, but merely to make the point that women are in general regarded as political and economic equals to men in modern American Society.
Considering that women are for the most part equal to men economically, there surely must be little motivation for prostitution. This is clearly not the case. The reasons for prostitution have changed since Goldman composed “The Traffic in Women.” Goldman blames economic oppression and inequality woman turning to prostitution. While these reasons may be relevant today, there exists economic potential for women not present in 1917. Instead, most prostitutes today are stranded by their childhood experiences. Enriquez does not mention economic factors in her explaining the reasons for women entering into prostitution. Figures suggest that as many as 95% of prostitutes are victims of childhood sexual abuse. This mistreatment is often regarded to play a role in driving a woman to sell herself. “I am convinced on a daily basis that women’s engagement in prostitution are linked to their experiences of incestuous rape…to cultural pressures to be sexually available to men,” notes Enriquez on page three Childhood sexual abuse is without a doubt a result of male stereotypes perpetuated by patriarchy. Even though the reasons for entering into the sex trade having changed, the horrible situations endured have not.
Equality created in social movements of the twentieth century represents only economic and political equality. It is still expected in America that men are to be physically superior to women. Enriquez distills a disturbing truth about society’s expecting men to desire prostitution. She says, “It is about definitions of masculinity where men are given unbridled access and unquestioned ownership to women’s bodies. It is about myths of men’s uncontrollable urge and right to buy or rape women whenever they feel the urge. So even when there is no cash involved as in prostitution, there is rape”(3). If men and women were equal in all respects (as statistics suggest) men would not perceive a right to a woman’s body. Goldman too realizes this perceived and even encouraged superiority. She notes that men are expected to engage in many sexual experiences, while women confined to “celibacy or prostitution,” that is belonging to one or being shared by all. Thus, it is this assumed sexual dominance that has historically justified and continues to justify prostitution.
As noted earlier, no woman becomes or continues to be a prostitute by true free will. They are forced into dire situations by economic constraints or societal pressures. Today, statistics suggest that child abuse plays a very large role in women turning to prostitution. Patriarchy is responsible for the sexual abuse of adolescents. Enriquez notes that women are also indoctrinated with the idea that allowing men access their bodies is empowering—another character of patriarchy. Thus, it is patriarchy that teaches that sexual exploitation is acceptable. Additionally, prevailing gender roles that justify men “needing” prostitutes. They are convinced that their sexual desires cannot be conquered by will alone and must be satisfied. By these two mechanisms, patriarchy provides the means and the motivation for rape to exist. Rape exists without capitalism, the addition of money merely changes its name to prostitution.
The exchange of money for sex exists external to the girl involved. According to Milton Friedman, exchanging money for goods or services implies consent and therefore choice among both parties. From that one may conclude that the women willingly agree to engage in sexual activity for money. But, they do not agree to do so, but rather are forced to accept money. According to Enriquez, most of the money goes to the pimps or managers. The Factbook on Global Sexual Exploitation provided by the University of Rhode Island offers disturbing insight regarding the relationship of pimps and prostitutes. In short, these women are forced by means of beating, psychological abuse and torture to pay their managers. When a woman accepts money in exchange for sex it is not for the sex that she receives the money, it is for safety from her pimp. There is no consent to sex in this process, only a desire for safety. The abuse of women by the pimps is clearly a patriarchal tendency. Turning again to the gender roles perpetuated by society, the pimp sees himself as dominant to the girls. In tern, he abuses and exploits them as he sees fit.
Even without a pimp, the woman does not fully consent to intercourse. When a woman relies on prostitution for survival she is forced to choose exploitation over death. In this way, prostitution is rape. If a man threatens a woman at gunpoint for sex the act is called rape. Yet, if a man gives the woman money it is called prostitution. Both are the same in that survival is the woman’s goal. Money merely happens to be the means of survival. A patriarchal society, even without personal property will have rape and prostitution. Prostitution exists solely as a product as patriarchy. Modern patriarchy creates the perceived need for prostitutes and forces women into prostitution. The woman does not engage in consensual sex and the process is thus not in the spirit of capitalism according to Milton Friedman. Even in the absence of a pimp women selling themselves is not an economic matter. Money is merely used as a means of survival, and sex as the tool to acquire money.
Movements toward foreign prostitution appear to be a trend motivated by economics. It is much cheaper to have sex with a woman from a country with a weak economy. Relaxed prostitution laws and uninformed child protection laws make it easier for men to hire as many women as they want. Enriquez explores foreign institutions of prostitution, finding that 4.4% of Korea’s economy comes from the sex trade. Sex tourism has recently become a popular, albeit underground, vacation for middle aged single men. German officials worry about prostitution shortages during World Cup events. It seems that prostitution is expanding and being popularized everywhere on earth.
Foreign success and profits in prostitution stem from society and globalization. Social movements in America have fought to discourage prostitution. Feminism taught society that women and men are equal, and made major steps in lessening economic factors that contribute to prostitution. Globalization has replicated throughout the third world the economic situations that drove women into prostitution in early twentieth century America. Goldman’s analysis of prostitution is thus applicable to many third world countries with factory based economies. Women are forced to be exploited in a factory, to sell their bodies or to starve. In countries like Thailand and the Philippines it is economically favorable to work as a prostitute than to work eighteen hour days in factories owned by multinational conglomerates. It is quite difficult to imagine a fate worse than prostitution, but working days on end in unsafe conditions, without sleep, for barely enough money to survive does come awfully close. Between existing patriarchal societies and economic situations imposed by globalization women are faced with more pressure for prostitution than in contemporary America.
Competition plays an important factor in the spread of foreign prostitution. According to Enriquez, it, “creates the pressure to ‘import’ younger and younger women from more ‘exotic’ backgrounds” (4). This demand does not come from the industry itself, but its customers. If one assumes that the market for women is not artificially stimulated then it can be concluded that there exists a genuine demand. The desire for “exotic” women stems from patriarchal predispositions. Friedman would attribute the popularity of the system not to the potential profits but to those who the industry attracts. In other words, profits develop as a response to demand. Capitalism thus merely reflects the desires of those who participate in it. While this may be a slightly optimistic view, it is safe to say that a market for prostitutes is not manipulated in the same manner that dominates the diamond market (that is to say there is a connection between those who purchase prostitutes and the institution itself). Because capitalism is merely adjusting with the will of the customer, it is those who use the prostitutes who are to blame for its spread.
Globalization aside, it is clearly patriarchal society that is responsible for prostitution’s spread in third world countries. Korea makes a great deal of money from the sex industry because its government fails to enforce its own laws. While the country does make a great deal of profit from allowing prostitution run rampant, it is the lack of regard for women’s rights that truly justifies the nation’s overlooking sex work. Any helping its citizens rather than attempting to profit is a good example of this. Today, the United States government spends billions of dollars each year to assist those who survive natural disasters. Prostitutes, like those in disaster zones, are virtually defenseless and lack the resources to improve their situation. Caring for the victims of a hurricane yields the same benefit to government and society as helping prostitutes escape their lives of torture. It is because of men not desire for wealth that these societies perceive a right to women’s bodies that they allow prostitution to continue. The mechanism is exactly the same as that which justifies the American sex trade.
Universally, patriarchy responsible for prostitution. Through gender roles reinforced by society men are convinced they have a right to a woman’s body. This, coupled with associated assumptions of female gender roles, creates a potential for rape. Merely placing money in the system renames rape prostitution. Because rape and by extension prostitution have nothing to do with economic superiority or growth it can be safely assumed that prostitution is not encouraged by capitalism alone. Capitalism plays a roll in encouraging such horrible treatment of women only through globalization in third world countries. Even then, it ultimately is patriarchy that takes advantage of the situation that women are forced into. While capitalism does manifest itself in other patriarchal ways, it finds little role in the core of prostitution. The abolishment of this harsh economic system will not bring female equality, since it certainly will not end prostitution and rape. Only through fighting against patriarchy can such abominations be ended.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)