The commodification of sexuality
‘Veronica’ is a 21-year-old Australian woman who has taken up film director-cum-pimp Justin Sisley’s offer to auction her virginity for his film.
“I need to do something with my life” is one of the justifications she gives here:
[vimeo]http://www.vimeo.com/11616540[/vimeo]
Being paraded in a meat-market style display in a Nevada brothel in an auction for her virginity is ‘something’ alright.
Veronica also says she’s never done “anything out of the ordinary” and that it’s a “good opportunity” to “challenge the way people think about sex”. In addition, the money could help her family.
She also says she finds it “hard to find a good man”. A rich sleeze who bids for her virginity is going to solve that problem?
Veronica’s interview feels terribly scripted, especially when she talks about challenging prevailing views about sex. I wonder if Sisley helped with her lines?
Veronica seems to think she will be involved in a one-off that will have no further bearing on her life.
“But it’s not going to be a regular thing, so in my head I can justify that I’m not going to be a prostitute,” she said.
But it will be a regular thing. The film will go viral in seconds and Veronica’s prostitution will be what she will always be remembered for. Regularly. It is unclear if Sisley plans to film this enchanted evening between two strangers. If he does, then it means she has been used to make pornography.
And what are the terms and conditions of the arrangement? What if the man who buys her wants to do things to her she hadn’t expected? What if he’s into torture, bondage, S&M? What if wants to access-all-areas? What if he wants to knock her around a bit? What if he stalks her after the event?
Where are the protections for her?
Perhaps Veronica needs to find out why the other candidates have dropped out of the project and why the filmmaker (who, incidentally, is advertised on a Government website) had to start from scratch and hunt for some fresh new virgins?
There are apparently some male ‘virgins’ (really, how would you know?) also taking part. Alex, 20, says he wants to “meet someone”. And John is “excited about the journey” that will lead him to his male or female buyer (he doesn’t mind which). It’s all about the journey. My amazing journey to the Nevada cattleyard where I was sold. By John.
The film makes a mockery of moves to address the global slave trade, which especially prizes young virgins. ‘Defloration’ websites are distressingly popular. And Veronica will be contributing to the spin of the global sex industry which paints sex selling as an exciting career move for young women.
If it goes ahead, this film will further entrench the commodification of sexuality. And Veronica may find herself wishing she’d found something else to do with her life.
27 Responses
I have to say, I found this post really offensive. I was prepared to let most of it pass, until I got to the line ‘really, how would you know?’ regarding male virginity.
Pretending that virginity is something super sacred is ridiculous and typically misogynist. It has directly led to things like hymen repair kits that are available in countries where it is still culturally required that women be virgins to enter marriage. The whole concept that virginity is special is based on the outdated notion that women were a commodity to be traded, and that their value was higher if they were unsullied by other men.
The reality is that the vaginal corona exists throughout the entire lifetime of a woman, certainly doesn’t disappear after the first sexual intercourse and most women do not bleed during their first sexual intercourse.
Regardless of the particular merits of selling virginity, claiming that you can always tell a female virgin, but a male virgin is almost certainly lying is insulting and thinly veiled misandry. You have to take the word of each gender, and even then it still shouldn’t mean much.
Arved, you are reading way more into that post than what Melinda has actually said. You are rebutting arguments she has not made.
Melinda hasn’t said anything about the sacredness or otherwise of virginity, she has commented on how what is on offer to this woman, is the opportunity to act as a prostitute – through her “pimp” who is also a film maker – and have her experience broadcast in a documentary and then on the internet forever. Veronica’s “virginity” is what these sick men are bidding for. Melinda then links this to the popularity of “young virgins” in the global sex trade and how websites with this theme are popular. Clearly virginity *is* important to those willing to pay $20 000 for sexual access to a virgin.
Surely the issue here is not the virginity or otherwise but the fact that film makers are selling of sex for entertainment and that a young woman thinks that this is a worthwhile way to ‘do something with her life.’
If only these film makers, Veronica and all those who will watch this film could meet some of the young women sold as sex slaves around the world and see the reality of their experience – maybe this would make them reconsider the appropriateness of their actions.
No, I don’t think I am. There is a lot of hate packed into that snide comment about male virginity. I can’t see how that could have arose other than she thinks virginity is somehow something sacred, and she’s bought into the idea that female virginity is extra special.
I’m not absolving the media. Giving ‘Veronica’s’ story far greater providence than the male virgins perpetuates the idea that female virginity is more ‘special’ than male virginity. As I’ve made clear, I don’t think virginity is ‘special’ at all, merely one’s state of being.
I’m not absolving the people who end up participating either. (I object to your implication that only men would be interested.) I do not think that that prostitution or pornography are inherently harmful, anti-women or a sign of the apocalypse, as long as all participants are consenting adults. However, a sex worker should be familiar with their own bodies, their comfort levels, and what gives them pleasure. They should be picky in choosing clients both for their own safety, and the level of service they then provide. A virginity auction is not an appropriate forum to encourage either.
Our bodies belong to ourselves and no one else; What we choose to do with them is our own business and no one else’s. Indeed, I applaud ‘Veronica’ and the others for taking advantage of our culture that pretends there is something special about virginity.
http://thepublicsphere.com/2009/03/is-the-selling-of-virginity-a-feminist-act/
Again, Arved, what you’re reading into Melinda’s post speaks more of your own agenda – which you go on to detail – rather than what she is actually arguing.
Then please explain how the comment about male virgins (‘really, how would you know?’) and for emphasis the quotes around the word ‘virgin’ is acceptable?
Human beings are emotional creatures and should be respected in completion, not as a for-sale getaway to cloud 9. If they are truly encouraging sexual well-being the producers should know their exp, particularly their first exp that will influence their future relationships, should be more about lovin than show time.
Before we allow a live auction of virgins to take place on TV, can we just take a second to think about where this is going?
Cos all my map reads is X-X-X, and its gold is as black as the market.
Arved it is well documented people’s first sexual experiences influence their future relationships. If her experience is like a mammal in a zoo or a fling on TV it is showcasing her vulnerability at physical and emotional levels. To presume she will be cut off from the experience as purely a social experiment is assuming her capacity to an object.
You are however right, our bodies belong to ourselves. The fact she is auctioning it is not an expression of freedom, but a sale into a sexual contract. How liberating.
Where is that government website you mentioned Melinda?
Michael I never argued otherwise. I agree that sex is something that should only be entered into when one is emotionally ready for it. ‘Veronica’, ‘John’ and ‘Alex’ may or may not be emotionally ready, that’s hardly something anyone other than they know. However, all of them are adults, and free to make their own decisions. Society, and certainly not feminists, should not be shaming them for their decisions.
My problem is that the very thing that Melinda is complaining about, the commodification of sexuality, is born out of the same thought process that led her to make such insulting remarks about male virgins. Implicit in that comment is that all males are sex fiends who could not possibly be virgins by the time they’re 20 and that they certainly would never give any rational thought to their own sexuality and emotional readiness. From that comes the conclusion that female virginity is extra special, and is far more valuable than male virginity. It is either claiming that women’s virginity is indeed a prize or that women are in need of extra protection from themselves. Both are patriarchal. That is the logic that leads people to pay vast sums for the ‘prize’ of virginity. It’s wrong and offensive.
Arved I don’t believe Melinda is shaming them for their decisions, but voicing concern for their well-fare. Melinda’s point about not knowing about the ‘male virgins’ you could also say highlights the way women are examined in some cultures to ensure their hymen is still intact. This is not something men are generally subject to.
It appears you may have read more into what she actually said then what she did. How is this article provoking a hate campaign towards men? She is highlighting a culture that is allowing human beings to be valued as commodities, and objecting to as it has been called, ‘sexploitation’.
Of course not all men are sex fiends Arved. Unfortunately however virginity has been ‘prized’ or ‘promoted’ as extra sexually gratifying for the male. I agree those in this ‘experiment’ are adults and free to make their own decisions, and should certainly not have their emotions played with any more considering what they are about to endeavour. However I don’t believe Melinda is out there to ‘name’ n ‘shame’ by any means anyone but a producer (and an industry) who although perhaps claims to value his project’s decisions, clearly has not considered the full psychological extent of what he is endorsing.
Please re-read my last paragraph. I never accused Melinda of ‘shaming’ these people.
My problem is the first sentence of her third last paragraph:
“There are apparently some male ‘virgins’ (really, how would you know?) also taking part.”
“Society, and certainly not feminists, should not be shaming them for their decisions.”
I assumed you were implying Melinda was ‘shaming’ the respondents as well Arved. I really think we shouldn’t be putting Melinda through a grinder, but applauding her efforts to highlight these issues.
You said: “I do not think that that prostitution or pornography are inherently harmful, anti-women..” Perhaps there is 10% that enjoy their ‘chosen’ career, but what happened to the other 90%? Are the naughty girls all plugged up? I really don’t mean to sound offensive I’m just using the same attitude that we’re not supposed to bat an eyelid at from the standard porn site. Such a wonderful career path. Ex-stars say 85% take drugs and alcohol to do a scene. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wy31Cip2cK8&feature=related
Do you really think Melinda is out to provoke a greater rift between men and women? Isn’t it’s obvious she is trying to uphold authenticity and authentic relationship?
Obviously you are concerned about equality, which is a nobel cause. It appears to me Melinda also cares about equality, which results in her comment that you describe as ‘snide’.
In some of your previous posts on this site you refer Melinda’s readers to websites where children are growing up, get over it. I’m sure if it was as simple as that, a government inquiry prompted by concerned experts and professionals alarmed by compounding problems stemming from the mainstreaming of a sexualised culture, would not have been conducted at all.
Further reading: http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2175450.htm
By singling out ‘Veronica’ as the only person of any worth to consider from the news article, that is what first raised my ire. I didn’t think it was deliberate until I got to the line I keep mentioning. I don’t see how anyone can defend that line as anything other than I have described it. The word ‘virgin’ is in quotes, and she quips that you can’t tell a male virgin. This is insulting and offensive.
Basic biology tells us that female virginity is also not possible to tell. The vaginal corona (the proper term for the hymen) remains with many women throughout their lives, although it may disappear entirely after childbirth. It is easy to reduce in size or rupture through activities other than penile penetration. Cosmetic surgery can be used to restore it or inserts could be used to fake the bleeding associated with a hymen (although only a small percentage of women bleed on their first sexual intercourse.). In short, examining the hymen cannot tell you if a women is a virgin or not. Melinda’s quip implies you can, and from the tone implies that female virginity is somehow more ‘precious’ than male virginity. I’ve outlined why I think that is not only insulting to both males and females, but also the same thought process that encourages ‘virginity’ auctions in the first place.
If you are as derisive of male virginity compared to female virginity as Melinda seems to be, then you are claiming that female virginity is indeed a ‘prize’ compared to male virginity. A female virgin is then ‘worth’ more than a non-virgin, and worth more than a male regardless of their state. This is precisely what allows the situation that Melinda is condemning in the first place.
My view is pragmatic. I think if society treated women equally, then things like this auction simply wouldn’t occur, because society wouldn’t place any higher value on female virgins compared to anyone else. This higher value is a direct result of an older patriarchal society, where fathers could effectively sell their daughter’s virginity for assets and power. At least now this woman is taking the benefits for herself. However, as people who want to see equal treatment for women, and the changes in society necessary, we should not be encouraging the idea that female virginity is worth more than male virginity.
My comment about shaming, was framed in this. I didn’t say Melinda was shaming them, indeed she points out above: “The film will go viral in seconds and Veronica’s prostitution will be what she will always be remembered for.” If that occurs, it is society’s problem. We should be working to change society from having that reaction. That reaction is based on the idea that female sexuality is and must be more ‘pure’ than male sexuality. That idea is at least partly based on the higher worth of female virginity.
I do not applaud her, because her derision about male virgins directly plays into the very problem she’s highlighting. She is contributing to the problem with that attitude.
As to the rest, I have a lot more to say on that, but I think it is off topic for this thread. I would be happy to discuss it privately if you wish. I probably shouldn’t have brought it up, but I wanted to highlight that I didn’t think ‘Veronica’, ‘John’ or ‘Alex’ were doing anything inherently wrong in any objective sense.
someone asked about the website promoting him, it is here:
http://www.afc.gov.au/filmsandawards/recentfilms/cannes06/feature_198.aspx
interestingly the link doesn’t work anymore. maybe they have removed it.
Arved you clearly do not understand male biology because in fact there is no way any male can be declared to be either a ‘virgin’ or not just based on examining his body. However, our patriarchal society promotes the myth that women unlike men can be declared to be ‘virgins’ based on whether or not the hymen is intact. This is despite the fact many women’s hymens do not remain intact irrespective of whether the penis has penetrated the vagina or not. Why do you think the cosmetic surgery industry is busily promoting this misogynistic lie if men as a group did not believe such lies. It certainly is not women who are the ones seeking to restore their mythical virginity because they themselves believe ‘virginity’ is the definition of what it means to be a woman. But it most certainly is the pornography industry as well as our patriarchal system which continues to claim women are not human but instead their sole value and worth lies in whether or not they have been ‘contaminated by the penis.’ The easiest method of ensuring continuing belief a woman’s worth lies in her ‘virginity’ is by ensuring women internalise this misogynistic lie, which is why recreating ‘virginity’ is promoted by the cosmetic industry. Because men as a group continue to hold socio-economic power over women as a group, the myth of female virginity continues unabated and that is why so many women seek to restore their supposedly ‘lost virginity’ because they know if the male discovers they have ‘horrors’ engaged in heterosex penetrative sexual activity then they are supposedly worthless in men’s eyes.
Why do you think Veronica is selling her so-called virginity? Because men continue to believe women are either virgins or whores and once a woman is seen or perceived as being sexually active she is supposedly no longer pure because she has been contaminated by a man. Men, however are expected to be sexually active and there is no disparagement of their sexual exploits because being sexually active is central to patriarchal definitions of what it means to be a ‘real man.’
Why do you think this female sexual auction is taking place? Because the pornographers know it will attract many male buyers and the pornographers will make huge profits by selling the film showing the male buyer penetrating the ‘virgin’ and proclaiming his male superiority and domination over women.
Your deliberate attempt to derail the focus of this article by claiming Melinda is demonising ‘male virgins’ will not work because the subject is about the deliberate male sexual exploitation of women. Furthermore misandry does not exist so do not try to claim it does. I have yet to read or hear women as a group have greater power than men and it is women who rule the world and define our society. Misogyny is very much alive and thriving as evidenced by this latest exploit of the sex/pornography industry.
If as you claim, we all own our bodies then you cannot blame society or even criticise society because in your view, no one has the right to criticise what another human being does with their body. After all, if we all own our bodies, this means women as a group and individually are not constrained or subjected to socio-economic inequalities because everyone is equal and everyone is able to avail themselves of whatever benefits they wish. This includes selling one’s body to the highest male bidder because it is all about individual choice. Likewise prostitution and pornography is apparently harmless because hey everyone owns their bodies and this means prostitution is not about male demand or belief that men as a group have the pseudo inalienable right of buying women just so they can masturbate into/on their bodies.
You state that if society treated women equally then things like this auction simply wouldn’t occur. But Arvid this auction is happening despite your claim that our bodies belong to ourselves – so how can his happen? Is it because the reality is women’s bodies do not belong to them but are the property of men and must always be made available for men to consume and then discard as ‘dirt.’
In what way is Veronica taking advantage of the supposed ‘benefits’ by selling her body to a male buyer? Will Veronica be able to say she will not submit to whatever the successful male buyer demands with regards to doing whatever sexual act(s) he wishes upon her body? After all, she is engaged in selling her body is she not and this means the buyer should have the right to do whatever he wishes to her body. It is only a transaction and not the deliberate sale of one human being to another human being. And no, don’t even begin to claim ‘but women will be interested in purchasing her’ because the sex/porn industry was created and is maintained by and for men’s benefit not women’s.
So the issue is not about Veronica it is about how the sex/pornography industry has successfully dehumanised women and girls and promotes the myth that women and girls are indeed ‘mens’ sexual service stations.’
Attempting to claim Melinda is demonising ‘male virgins’ is a very old, old patriarchal ploy because the world does indeed supposedly revolve around men, which is why you attempted to raise the issue of ‘men are sex fiends.’ Ah that is another old, old, patriarchal ploy attemtping to change the subject by once again depicting men as ‘victims of feminist hatred.’
Arvid if, as you believe our bodies belong to ourselves (I wish oh I wish women’s bodies did belong to them and were not owned by men) then you cannot criticise society because society is irrelevant – given our bodies belong to ourselves. Society is apparently irrelevant because hey, we are all free and able to do whatever we wish with our bodies and yet you claim patriarchy is responsible for creating the myth of the ‘female virgin.’
Thank you for your engagement Hecuba, but I do not think you read my posts, or the original article Melinda linked to, correctly. It is, of course, true that you cannot tell male virginity by examination. Indeed, my complaint is based on the fact that neither male nor female virginity can be determined by an examination. This is an event where both male and female virgins are to be auctioned. Melinda singled out the female as the only person worthy of consideration. In addition, she was derisive of the two male virgins in the article. This was demonstrated by using quotes around the word ‘virgin’ when describing them and having a snide remark: ‘really, how would you know’. If biology requires us to take the word of both males and females regarding their virginity, why should anyone be so scornful of self declared male virgins?
I stated that I agree that society thinks that virginity is special. I do not think this virginity is special, and the claim that it is should be challenged. The idea that virginity, particularly female virginity, is special is based on the idea of sexual purity, which is an outdated patriarchal idea. It is the claim that female virgins have more value than male virgins. By being so dismissive of the male virgins, Melinda is playing into this idea and keeping it alive. I don’t think it is an idea that should be kept alive.
In an ideal society, male and female virginity would be equally valuable, and that value would be none at all. Virginity is simply a state of being and should not have any inherent value. In such a society, things like this virginity auction wouldn’t exist, because no one would see any value in virginity above and beyond value of the people. I do not think virginity auctions are a good idea, although I was pleased to see that male virgins were included. That is perhaps a first step to killing such events all together. It is a step towards eliminating the notion that any virginity is special, let alone female virginity.
Of course misandry exists. Misandry is simply a hatred of men, like misogyny is a hatred of women. Want to know what else exists? Female child abusers, paedophiles and rapists. These things certainly aren’t common compared to male offenders, and thus certainly don’t warrant the same level of concern, but to pretend they don’t exist is stupid and short-sighted.
Pornography and erotica made for and/or by women also exists. Some women enjoy looking at naked men. It exists, and it is perhaps one of the fastest growing markets. Melinda recently highlighted that male prostitutes and strippers also exist. Some women can be voyeuristic, and I do not think voyeurism or exhibitionism are necessarily wrong. Certainly there does exist pornography that is unredeemable, and that should be attacked, but I do not think all pornography fits in that basket.
I do think we own our bodies. Certainly there is a long way to go for equality. There are too many women living in wretched conditions. Religion is one of the primary sources that destroy a lot of women’s lives. One need only look at Muslim countries to see that (Taslima Nasrin is one of my heroes). I do agree that prostitution or pornography can often not be a ‘free’ choice due to socio-economic situations. It can be choosing the lesser of two evils. The solutions isn’t to shut down pornography and prostitution as options, however. That only leaves women who would make that choice with the worse evil. The solution is to fix the underlying socio-economic problems. That will eliminate the need for women to make such a choice in the first place.
In older times, Veronica’s father would have sold her to another man for the rest of her life. The improvement is that Veronica, rather than her father, is claiming the monetary benefit now and as a once off. The terms of the contract will determine exactly what kind of sex Veronica is agreeing to (and John, and Alex). If the buyer attempts to exceed the terms, then it becomes rape. (I haven’t seen the contract, have you?) This is still, obviously, not ideal, but it is a huge step over fathers thinking their daughters are theirs to sell, which is still sadly a huge problem in many parts of the world.
So, Arved, if your 16 year old daughter wanted to sell her virginity doing a porno, you’d be fine with that?
I get your point about the equality – but being from the other team, I DO think male virginity is important. I come from the perspective that sexual purity is not about oppression but about enjoying the gift of sexuality in its context (marriage).
You’re right, we shouldn’t be mocking them or belittling them. We should prize virginity equally in men and women.
@Arved — err…. it’s a statement of fact. You can’t tell if a male is a virgin. The males may or may not be virgins. You’re, making an arguement where none exists.
I agree with much of what you say. I’m guessing that Melinda probably does, too. You can’t tell from her post as she hasn’t done what you have accused her of.
@Tom – Of course you can’t tell a male virgin. As I’ve said repeatedly, the point is you can’t tell a female virgin either. To then speak of *only* male virgins in such a derisive manner is insulting and perpetuates the problem. To believe that someone is a virgin is to accept their word.
I’ve read the entire post again with fresh eyes. The words and tone of that particular sentence still offend me, and I think send completely the wrong message. However, as no one else seems to agree, I shan’t push it any further.
@Jennifer – A 16 year old cannot legally appear in pornography. However, I am of the opinion that as long as my child were happy, healthy and safe, then I’d be proud of them no matter what their choice. I do not think it is wise to impose values on children, instead it is better to equip them with critical thinking, and let them get there on their own. The whole point I’ve been trying to get across is that it shouldn’t matter if it is a son or a daughter.
I do not put marriage on such high a pedestal. I think it has also been a tool to for manipulation. Certainly there is value in two people committing to each other, and raising a family together, but I do not think that has to be within the context of marriage. I also disagree that sex outside of such a commitment is necessarily bad.
When I heard this story on the news I nearly cried, then nearly vomitted. Sex should not be bought and sold and certainly not as part of someone’s documentary, when huge sums are being offered to the participants. This is definitely a situation where the “virgins” might think they’re onto the winner, but may cause a lot of damage.
Im I the only one who finds this article truly intresting. The fact of the matter is poeple have so many difrent outlooks on the subject it kind of hard to tell who is right or wrong.
Aint it the truth, I truley share the same views as the author and could not agree more.
“When I heard this story on the news I nearly cried, then nearly vomitted. Sex should not be bought and sold and certainly not as part of someone’s documentary, when huge sums are being offered to the participants. This is definitely a situation where the “virgins” might think they’re onto the winner, but may cause a lot of damage.”
Huge sums?
Porn stars are paid ~$5000-$10000 USD per scene.
Everyone is calling this prostitution/ pornography. It isnt. The bloke is simply filming a doco on what people think of virginity and they feel about it after losing it.
Also found it offensive to call out Males as being liars about virginity.
How do you define virginity? The hymen? The intercourse? The thought?
A female can rupture/break her hymen just by doing palates, are we to assume all females in the local gym are no longer virgins?