Lust: a reinforcer of capitalism What or who decides what we lust for? Lust is something that is so primal and biological hence, it may seem like the choice is almost autonomous, a natural urge but, when we analyze it deeply, we understand just how much of it is a choice and how much is imposed on us by those in power. According to psychology, lust is one of the most powerful primitive motives for action then why wouldn’t an exploitative economic regime try and use it to manipulate the societal norms to further their agenda of the “never-ending pursuit of profit”? For instance, “Sex sells”: a phrase commonly heard in every marketing and advertising class clearly indicates how capitalism manufactures needs and hence remains the most intrusive form of production and organization that humanity has known. In this essay we will attempt to relate lust (super structure) to capitalism (base) by structuring the analysis on the themes of sex, marriage, fetishism, pornography, and prostitution. Sex: What people lust for and whether they can indulge in it is highly dependent on the class and socio-economic stratification. Hence, making lust relevant to class-inequality and ultimately capitalism. Sex as understood today is not just a union of individuals, it is no longer immaterial or intangible. Now there are material expectations involved in the processes that lead up to it and in the act itself. What kind of a partner/s are we attracted to? How much capital do they have? Where do they live? We look for traces of their class in the way they look, talk, walk, and carry themselves. Ultimately, what we are attracted to boils down to materialistic needs of wealth, resources, access etc. Further materialism can occur because of the expectations and ideals attached to sex and desire. If we deconstruct these expectations and ideals then we get things as specific as the beauty standards, the sexual accessories, the kind of clothes, the room, the ambience and more. All these commodities which are not biologically needed but are still sought after are enforced by the norms set with the help of instruments like the media to fill the pockets of the bourgeoisie by exploiting off insecurities and the enthusiastic conformity out of manufactured lust. It then directly links to the base by catering to the multi-million-dollar industries of plastic surgeries, clothing lines and other lifestyle commodities. These insecurities about the ‘self’ stem from the consumerist ideology of "what you have is who you are.” “Intimate and erotic relations have been sexualized to solely serve the realm of the heteromonogamous relationship. As a result, bodies that desire physical closeness with others must engage in these sanctioned norms, or they are labeled deviant.” Capitalism affecting the perspective on sexuality: 1. The Heteronormative Culture: the purpose of sexuality was traditionally thought to be reproduction which was aligned with the older capitalism as it was primarily dependent on workers and hence needed human resource but why then in the time of neo-capitalism are states and their laws reinforcing heterosexuality and the patriarchal idea of a family? Perhaps because while they do not need to entirely depend on workers for profit, they still need more consumers and they still need to maintain the high unemployment rates to create competition among workers and take away the power of choice from them. 2. Rainbow capitalism: ironically, capitalism also faux-celebrates the deviation from heteronormativity just as long as it gets them profit. Marketing commodities by incorporating queerness while creating no real substantive difference in the lives of those who identify themselves in the LGBTQIA+ community depicts the sheer exploitative nature of capitalism and how they profit from who we are attracted to. Marriage: In modern society, sex and lust have been understood to materialize through the institution of marriage. Consequently, “marriage as a contractual agreement in the service of the state is the only socially sanctioned way of performing sexuality. All other manifestations are seen as morally divergent, to varying extents.” Things like how to make oneself the ideal mate desired by all, start being relevant, individuals try to fit into the norms and roles of a heteronormative situation with the man working and earning while the ideal wife (in the patriarchal sense) serves to the needs of the man (taking care of and maintaining the worker) and reproducing the workers. These typical gender roles are a norm to the masses and hence what they lust for in a partner. Men’s sexual attraction towards docile, shy, nurturing and amiable women while for women it is the ‘alpha-male’ who is the man of the house, protects, earns and controls the house. Moreover, exploring weddings and the expensive Honeymoon holidays as a direct link to capitalist ideas making sex and lust a big transaction which can be used to acquire profit. Statements such as, “You need to have a big fat Indian wedding or your wedding isn’t relevant or worthy of being celebrated” come across. It is a societal expectation that weddings must be grand and must be followed by an expensive Honeymoon, all this then becomes a necessity (manufactured need) to fulfill the lust. Fetishism: Fetishizing bodies, cultures, practices, gender roles, idealism and parts and pieces, in a way alienating the whole from its segments. Commodification is a big part of fetishism, especially with bodies because it dehumanizes and segments them. Let us take a few instances: Virginity- commodification of a woman’s body: The obsession with a virgin woman and how society devalues a woman who is not a virgin is a clear example. It is patriarchal and it punishes the woman specifically for deviating from the norm of ‘sex after marriage.’ It completely alienates the woman as a conscious being from her body, as if the individual is reduced to just their physical state of being a virgin or not. Moreover, something as specific as fetishizing the ‘Sugar Daddy’ culture. Here, there is an older man having sexual relations with a younger woman in exchange of lavishing money on her in the form of expensive gifts, here the man is rewarded for his hard work in contributing to the economy by getting his lust fulfilled by a younger and desirable woman, which then serves as motivation to work and indulge more. This is aligned with capitalism and patriarchy, not to forget the unequal relations between the woman and man here as well. We will understand fetishism of body parts in terms of commodification and idealism better in Pornography and media. Pornography: Pornography is a powerful media (a super-structure) it is the consequence of lust and plays an important role in deciding what we lust for. It not only sets ideals of appearance on a very intimate level but also creates an ideal as to how act should be/ feel like or look like. The pornographic industry is a billion-dollar, ever-growing industry; more pornographic films are released than movies in Hollywood each year and they are strategically constructed in order to sell, far off from reality. Lust, something that is supposed to be a natural phenomenon suddenly gets loaded with norms, standards, ideals, and expectations. Generally, it caters to patriarchy and the male gaze. The image that women serve the ideal role of mother and a wife to the nation by serving to and complying with the man. For instance, “The Japanese woman is serving the male who is serving the state by working, a reward for fitting into the “proper” working class role. Salarymen and porn scenes on the train on the daily commute are common. These are the spaces in which the common man that falls into the narratives of patriarchy occupy” Basically, it is the rewarding fantasy of having your primal desires satisfied for adhering to the duty of the state. Moreover, The Ideal Female body of big breasts, emphasized curves, small waist, and hairless bodies becoming the norm in such media. These flawless unattainable beauty standards create a market for cosmetics and surgeries which in turn exploit impressionable masses by creating needs and insecurities that they ultimately profit from. The problem is with commodification of bodies, “If you see breasts that the ideal woman is “supposed” to possess, then someone’s pockets will be lined with the currency of people’s insecurities.” (Dixon, 2017) depicting the actresses’ body as an object to be gazed at and consumed. In capitalism, the body, especially women’s bodies, are regarded as a commodity, alienating them, as a conscious individual from their body, the ones who are consuming the content do not think of the actress as an individual who exists beyond that video in the screen. Further, even the fetishization of sexuality in pornography, how in most cases it same-sex pornography is not even looked at as a serious sexual-orientation rather as something taboo meant solely for experimentation and nothing more. Capitalist structure then invalidates an entire gender-identity because it does not fit with the capitalist ideology of reproductive sex as the only accepted sexual desire. Prostitution: It is a consequence of lust and its need to commodify a woman’s body. Marx says women engage in prostitution because they are the victims of capitalism and patriarchy. But then they end up reinforcing those same ideologies when they give in to the male gaze to become commercial sex workers. There is an unequal relation, in terms of dignity and power in prostitution, there is an importance of gender in the differing power dynamic in terms of the male prostitutes (gigolos) and female prostitutes. There is also alienation of labor in prostitution, the individual becomes just a body, a means of fulfilling sexual desire, the identity of the worker is lost, they are not involved in the process. Furthermore, exploitation from the person who owns their labor in case there is a brothel-keeper involved, then the lust manufactured directly links to labor exploitation. Insights: I have always understood lust and sexual desire to be emotional and influenced more by psychology than sociology, but re-evaluating it again with different lenses and perspectives really changed my mind. Writing this assignment forced me to think deeply of everyday conversations around this theme and it was asking the ‘why’ that made me realize so many things that I just took at face value. It has been a positive experience of respecting the boundaries of the conversation, ensuring it stays accurate, trying my best to give it structure with all the overlapping and many aspects of this theme and deconstructing some of the taken for granted aspects. I could correlate a lot of things discussed in class in terms of commodification, alienation, creation of unemployment etc. This assignment has ensured that the next time I come across something as a given or an obvious, I will dismantle it and try to question and understand it better in my own terms. Bibliography: Casanova, & M, A. (1970, January 1). The commodification of desire: Sex, stereotypes, and stripping. ScholarWorks. Retrieved September 18, 2022, from https://scholarworks.calstate.edu/concern/theses/5t34sk19w?locale=es Dixon, D. (n.d.). Commodification of desire. Embodying Japan: Cultures of Sport, Beauty, and Medicine 2017. Retrieved September 17, 2022, from https://scalar.usc.edu/works/embodying-japan-cultures-of-sport-beauty-and-medicine2017/commodification-of-desire Dixon, D. (n.d.). Reinforcing ideals through pornography. Embodying Japan: Cultures of Sport, Beauty, and Medicine 2017. Retrieved September 18, 2022, from https://scalar.usc.edu/works/embodying-japan-cultures-of-sport-beauty-and-medicine2017/reinforcing-ideals-through-pornography Marxism and sexuality. libcom.org. (2020, May). Retrieved September 18, 2022, from https://libcom.org/article/marxism-and-sexuality Wilson, C. (n.d.). Sexuality and capitalism. Sexuality and capitalism | International Socialist Review. Retrieved September 18, 2022, from https://isreview.org/issue/94/sexuality-andcapitalism/index.html Dillon, M. (2020). Karl Marx. In Introduction to sociological theory theorists, concepts, and their applicability to the twenty-first century. essay, John Wiley & Sons.
