Or, How Were Teaching Sad Young Men to End Up Hating Women
Instead of Loving Themselves
They wouldnt need to shoot up schools if they werent sexually
frustrated!! They hate women because women wont have sex with
them!! Its womens fault, not theirs! Theres a surplus of low-status
men! The sexual marketplace has failed them!! So cries
Lets ask the question: does the right-wing theory of sex and
love make any sense? Or is it just plain ignorance
The theory goes something like this. Men are buyers in a
marketplace, and women are sellers. Men bid. The more of a cocktail
of money, muscles, and power that they have, the more currency they
have to bid with. The more prettiness, shapeliness, blondness, and
fertility, a woman has, the more valuable they are. Men buy, and
women sell. But what are men buying? They are not just buying sex.
They are buying sex with the hottest woman.
First notice what the above really is. Its economic
determinismhuman relationships reduced to neoliberal economics,
extreme capitalism by another name, materialist individualism. The
richest person wins! He owns the best stuff!! Only the strong
survive! Life is competition!! And so on.
Now note has happened here. The only party with agency is the
man. The woman is reduced to a resource, a commodity, and, of
course, an object. She has no subjectivity, no reality, no
interiority. But the man is reduced, toohis agency is diminished to
the size of his wallet, muscles, and status. It isnt moral,
ethical, emotional, or social agency, its just physical and
financial agency. But is that all either person isthis little
shrunken thing? Is this theory in any way accurate?
Lets first critique it economically. Commodities are
interchangeable things, like wheat, or corn, and people are not.
Resources are things we can use up and throw away, and people are
not. Women are not commodities or resourcesbut neither,
interestingly, are men, so this fictional currency of money, looks,
and status cannot really exist, either. So the theory of a sexual
marketplace falls apart with just the merest touch.
Now. Lets come back to the question of hotness. The idea of
hotness is that our preferences all our the sameblond and thin on
one side, and rich, powerful, and muscled on the other. Thus, the
hottest person is the one desired by everyone, because they have
the most of these qualities, and in that way, hotness presumes that
people are interchangeable againon both sides, the desired and the
But is the person that you love really interchangeable with
someone else? Are your preferences really interchangeable with
anyone elses? Of course not. If we...