the short.end.

Evolution and "human nature"...

In evolutionary psychology there is a concept known as “reproductively relevant currencies”, which is a scholarly way of saying that all heterosexual relationships use some form of exchange along the lines of resources in exchange for sex/reproduction and visa versa.  This could range from anything as simple as a dinner date where the man pays in hopes of winning favor with a female, or as explicit as sex workers providing sexual services for money. It is an exchange as old as the dawn of time, and can even be seen happening in chimpanzees. Thus, women have the world’s oldest “commodity” of sex/reproductive capacities that they exchange for resources like time (care), physical protection, and of course, money. (Read more on this topic here )

Women’s sexual "commodity" today…

“Sexuality is a life force.  Yet we live in a culture where this element of our lives is either repressed or exploited.  Television screens allow our children to watch countless murders and crime shows but censor any scenes that involve nudity or lovemaking.  Hard work and upward mobility are stressed (and stressful), while those who engage in simple pleasures are called lazy, weak, or self-indulgent.  Still the need for pleasure pushes onward, and people instead seek negative outlets in the form of alcohol and drugs, sexual addiction, violence, rape, and crude pornography, while millions of dollars play on the repressed sexuality in all of us.  When something vital and natural is taken away, the resulting gap can be used as an implement for control.  What’s taken away is then sold back to us, piecemeal, and we are less than whole because of it.” – Anodea Judith

The problem that women face today (and have in the past) is the regulation and exploitation of their sexuality by a male-dominated society. Women’s sexuality is governed by social values and norms that force them into the role of either a whore; that exploits her sexuality, or a virgin; that has no capacity for being sexual. Through mainstream media and culture we learn to objectify ourselves and see ourselves through the lens of the male gaze. Our sexuality is either exploited and sold for profit as with advertising, or we have our insecurities leverage against us so that, in the words of Margaret Chow: “We buy a $200 turn-around cream that doesn’t turn around shit!”. We also have our sexuality supervised and controlled by double standard that leave women being called “sluts” and “whores” not only by men, but other women too.  Are we profiting from our sexuality? Is your investment of time and energy in your feminine appearance giving good returns?

How the exchange works today…

 Assuming that you believe men “can’t help” objectifying women, then you must conversely believe that woman have an equal uncontrollable urge to secure resources from men. Because, in reality, these two “tendencies” developed in tandem, many millions of years ago. There could not be one without the other. Yet interestingly our society has it arranged so that men are able to objectify, ogle at, and “visually consume” as much female sexuality as they want, sometimes without the woman directly profiting from the exchange. The sad reason for that is that women often serve themselves up to be objectified by males without securing any resources from the male. In the cases where the woman does directly profit; whether it be “gold-digging”, stripping, or prostitution, it is a seedy business. Women do not get respect or are considered politically powerful if they are a prostitutes, strippers, or even models. Profiting from our sexuality is mostly demonized in our culture, and so I just can’t bring myself to believe that it is a form of “women’s lib”. On the other hand, men are free to watch porn, go to the strippers, and openly ogle any women within their line of sight. It is getting more common for men to behave however they want sexually in the name of “human nature”.

Monogamy for women; “human nature” for men…

Feminism, and women’s empowerment has been the driving force behind women no longer going purely after a man’s resources. Some women aren’t (or else do not openly admit) only looking for a wealthy partner. They want a lifelong friend and companion that share their interests, hopes, and dreams. Many women such as myself have weighed the pros and cons, and decided that in the noble fight for equality we will not succumb to the temptation of gold-digging, even though it is “human nature” for women to trade sex for money. We support ourselves; we pay for our own meals; and we insist on equality, with the implicit understanding that our partners will do the same. And so we enter into a monogamous relationship with the understanding that we will not exploit our sexuality to gain resources from another male. (I expect I would be in a great deal of trouble from my partner if I flashed a stranger in exchange for a nice meal, or if I stripped down and danced for a man in exchange for some money.) Yet we are met, over and over, with a glaring double standard: that your man is happy not to pay for your “wares”, thereby waiving the cover charge of your establishment, but more that happy to spend his resources (mental energy, sperm, time, and sometimes money) elsewhere at the same time. “Monogamous” men that dedicate any of their resources to other women; whether it be a waitress, a strip club, or pornography, is not adhering to the implicit agreement of monogamy. Often it is because they will argue that they don’t mind if you do the same (i.e. watch porn, or go to the strippers), but the truth is that it is not the same exchange. Remember: men buy sex; women sell it. We have no need or desire to pay for any sort of sex, we have more than enough offers as it is. It would be more fair if men thought it is fine for us to profit from our sexuality by being in porn, or stripping.

Pick a side, and have both people play on it…

Again, men that argue that it is human nature to dedicate any of their mental or physical resources to other women, should then have no problem accepting that it is human nature for women to want money in exchange for their sexuality. So either the man should start paying his mate for her being sexually available to him, or she should be able to get some money or other resources from other males. If that doesn’t “sit right” with both parties, then both parties have to agree to be truly and equally monogamous. Either way, equality cannot exist in a relationship where women are constantly getting the short end of the stick concerning the exchange of reproductively relevant currencies.