Objectivism's View of Prostitution

Erica,

You yourself are irresistable, and should stop (but please don't!) enticing those of us not lucky enough to have you offer us those services which your fictional character does. If my boyfriend were reading these posts, he would be most jealous, if not enticed himself.

Can your character then either develop, in that she started with some false premise or from some poor circumstance, or could she either have lost a love, and thought that she would never truly love again, or again have some other agenda like Kira's which justifies her position?

Can you imagine her as a beautiful Ayn Rand/John Galt in a society of non-objectivists who spreads her message and then leaves the men wanting more once she has achieved what she wants with them? And again, have you read Heinlein's Friday?

The image is from the Czech cover

(Edited by Ted Keer
on 12/03, 3:26pm)

Post 41

Sunday, December 3, 2006 - 6:39am

"Dangerous Beauty"

Spot on, Ted. That's it.

Post 42

Sunday, December 3, 2006 - 6:56am

Teresa, thanks for the encouragement...I am really excited at the thought of further fleshing out this character. I hate to give up any of my "people"...:-)

Erica, you simply MUST give the religious right something else to wring their hands over! <g>
Oh, the anticipation...

Post 43

Sunday, December 3, 2006 - 11:56am

and thought that she would never truly love again

Ok, Ted...you're hitting on something here...she had not found love for herself previously, and had rather given up on the prospect. And, to delve headfirst (no pun intended) into the psychological aspect here, I believe that her ability and desire to treat men the way she did was actually an expression of a need to do so...what I mean is, she would have loved, and much preferred, to lavish that kind of loving attention on one man, her soul mate. But he did not exist. So her clients were a kind of outlet for her own needs, though they never knew it.

And she did get kind of a chuckle knowing that she "could leave them wanting more"...though, once again, not strictly in the sexual sense. You see, her clients were not Objectivist men, though they were definitely prime movers and producers. Nina was more charming, more attentive, and far more intelligent than any of their trophy wives, and this is what kept them coming back, but if you cornered one of these men and asked him to compare Nina to his wife, he would probably not understand why. In the story, I hinted at the kind of anti-conceptual mentality (the scholars on the board will correct me if I am using that Randian term incorrectly) that would still allow any of these men to view Nina as a whore---a wonderful, fantastic and utterly charming whore who brings them much joy---but a whore nonetheless, and therefore not really in a category to be compared with the women they've deemed worthy of actual marriage. (I couldn't wait to explore that angle..I love ripping apart people who regularly employ two distinct sets of logic that unavoidably work at cross purposes in their head!)

Now, I am aware that the psychological basis for some of Nina's actions may not strike anyone as "healthy or proper", especially by Objectivist standards. But I make no apologies for them. I once explained to a friend that I wanted to create characters that were clearly guided by Objectivism, but who possessed the real psychological baggage and personal failings that we all do. As wonderful, and inspiring, as Dagny, and John, and Howard are, these people are perfect. Never a nagging doubt, never a misstep. I understood that they represented an ideal...something to which we could all strive. I started writing Nina (as well as other characters) because I found myself wanting to get lost in a story of people who reminded me more of myself.
No, I'm not a courtesan :-(
(But I can't claim to have run away from home at 12 and made my own fortune, either. :-)

As for your question about Heinlein's "Friday"...no I have not read this, but after seeing the reviews on Amazon (as well as your own esteemed recommendation) I will be picking this up. Thanks Ted.

Teresa,

Erica, you simply MUST give the religious right something else to wring their hands over! <g>
Oh, the anticipation...

Indeed, that alone may be the reason I simply must carry on...

Erica Schulz

Post 44

Sunday, December 3, 2006 - 1:47pm

"I am aware that the psychological basis for some of Nina's actions may not strike anyone as "healthy or proper", especially by Objectivist standards. But I make no apologies for them."

Erica,

The merit of your story will stand or fall on its own, and at best one might read it, react, and then use Rand's aesthetics, ethics and epistemology to analyze why. Objectivism is not and cannot be a filter through which we prejudge everything in the optional realm before exploring, denying anything we fear might fall outside the bounds. An artist especially cannot think in these terms. Rand herself says as much in her posthumous Art of Fiction, which I assume you have read, and which you should read ASAP if you haven't. (There are two titles, Fiction & Nonfiction, and both titles are great even for non-writers. My musician boyfriend carries around dog-earred copies of each, as well as of the Romantic Manifesto.)

As for your character, I would suggest from personal experience that after a loss, such as the murder of my first boyfriend, "desperate acts" or the fear of never loving again might be much more natural an impetus toward Nina's career than simply not yet having found someone good enough. It would seem strange to me for someone with other talents to simply give up ahead of time on finding someone. I think some hurt or tragedy might, in the "right" circumsatnces, lead down that path.

I am also curious if you have read Niven's Ringworld series. He has an alien humanoid character who is a ruthless sexual manipulator who had worked as a courtesan on intestellar space ships. This novel is not as good as Friday and the character I mention is not outstanding or the focus of the story, but it is another piece of fiction that came to mind.

Ted Keer, 03 December, 2006, NYC\

The image is an artist's rendition of Niven's Rinworld at www.orionworks.com.

Post 45

Monday, December 4, 2006 - 9:27am

Has anyone considered the courtesan from "Firefly" as a good model of what we are discussing?

Ted - I love Heinlein too, I think my early reading of his works is why Objectivism made so much sense to me once I found out about it. I even wrote my college entry essay on him.

Post 46

Monday, December 4, 2006 - 4:06pm

I found it quite interesting and entertaining that in the world of Firefly and Serenity that "companions" were considered upper class.

Post 47

Saturday, December 9, 2006 - 12:50am

What about back (and foot) rubs, a cold drink, and a discussion of Objectivist philosophy, in addition? Tell the truth...could you resist Nina? ;-)

Couldn't resist tonight... too tired, after roller blading through the streets of L.A. (Venice & surround). I don't know if I could handle the talk, I'd jumble all my words together and collapse in exhaustion.

Does she know how to work the aches out of quadriceps?

Post 48

Saturday, December 9, 2006 - 9:44am

http://www.t-nation.com/findArticle.do?article=04-046-training

Post 49

Saturday, December 9, 2006 - 7:34pm

Kurt, My experience with Heinlein is the same as yours. I have long intended to start a thread on him, but haven't the time right now. I was overjoyed to read him mention Rang in Moon is a Harsh Mistress. My four favorites of his are that title, Friday, Farnham's Freehold, and Time Enough for Love.

Ted

Post 50

Saturday, December 9, 2006 - 8:42pm

I started reading Heinlein's "juvenile" fiction at about ten years old. "Citizen of the Galaxy" was my first and I read it several times. I was lucky it was in our local library. "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" is a favorite. I'm with Kurt, reading Heinlein first made Ayn Rand seem very familiar.

Jim Powell wrote an excellent article in the July 1997 Freeman. Quoting author J. Neil Schulman:

"If Robert Heinlein hadn't written the books he wrote, and I hadn't read them, I doubt very much that I would have had the intellectual background necessary to climb out of the hole I was in between the ages of fifteen and eighteen. He wrote about futures that were worth living for. He wrote about talented people who felt life was worth living and made it worth living, no matter what the breaks that fell their way. His characters never had an easy time of it, but they persevered."

That's pretty much the way I feel. If I hadn't read Heinlein when I did I don't know if I'd have been able to climb out of the hole I was in. I don't think that by the age of seventeen or eighteen when I read Rand I would have been able to grasp what she was saying.

Post 51

Sunday, December 10, 2006 - 1:34pm

I have added a thread on Heinlein to the general forum and submitted a review of Citizen of the Galaxy there.

Post 52

Sunday, December 10, 2006 - 3:22pm

I appreciate the thoughtful comments people made in this thread and found them quite interesting and informative. Since my Gallery Movie review of Cathouse sparked this thread, yet I have not seen anyone in this thread claim to have seen it, I wanted to post some general comments. I do not aim these at any particular posts in this thread although they might bear some relevance to some of them.

The sex workers in Cathouse simply like sex a great deal. As to why they like it so much, I cannot say. Some paternalists speculate that a sex worker might suffer from psychological damage via sexual abuse in childhood, etc. which leads her to that lifestyle. Regardless, these women choose that career and absolutely love to "get off" with men, women or vibrators. The brothel where HBO records Cathouse literally seethes with a palpable sexual energy that seems transmissible even through the television.

I will not engage in paternalistic psychologizing about the "poor girls" in that industry who are neither poor nor girls. Instead, I will respect adults to know their own souls well enough to make their own decisions. The same goes for their customers.

The traditional model of romance, especially lifelong romance, simply does not fit all people all the time. Sexual mores need to expand to accommodate that harsh reality. Hence, my generally approving attitude about the antics in Cathouse have not changed since I posted my initial review.

Post 53

Sunday, December 10, 2006 - 4:26pm

So, what you're saying, Luke, if I understand you correctly, is that there is no ideal sexual lifestyle beyond what a person chooses. In other words, whatever a person chooses is ideal, simply because the person chose it. Is that your position?

Or would you say that some sexual lifestyles have more to offer than others, even if they're not recognized as such, and therefore ought to be chosen in preference to others?

- Bill

Post 54

Sunday, December 10, 2006 - 5:23pm

Bill asked:

Or would you say that some sexual lifestyles have more to offer than others, even if they're not recognized as such, and therefore ought to be chosen in preference to others?

I would argue in favor of this view.

I admit I still need to chew this some more. But let me do my best to summarize my view.

From the standpoint of human evolution, sexual pleasure originated to assure propogation of the species. Sexual bonding originated along with parent to child bonding to assure both parents availed themselves to raising the offspring of their sexual union into functioning adults. This marked the origins of sexual and, later, romantic love.

From my own observations, physical features like curves in a woman or angles in a man indicate physical and reproductive genetic survival features. This would explain the raw, physical, animal attractions people feel for each other as well as the physical descriptors Ayn Rand uses for the protagonists in her novels.

I do not recall Ayn Rand appealing to evolution in her arguments for romantic love. She simply appealed to issues of values, particularly character and sense of life, as the basis of sexual attraction. While I agree that a committed romantic relationship requires an appeal to the higher values of reason, purpose and self-esteem, I want to distinguish between what a person might find "physically attractive" against what a person might find "romantically attractive." I find many women physically attractive, but very few romantically attractive given the stark differences in core values. So while I might enjoy sex with the former physically, I would only enjoy a committed relationship with the latter both spiritually and physically.

The highest and best of human potential integrates spirit and body of the individual and, during conjugation, the couple. But not everyone can achieve this ideal. So a person would have a good motive to use the traditional man-woman romance model as a worthy starting template and then employ introspection to determine how well that model "fits" that particular person. He would expect a trial and error approach to some degree. But this still differs from starting with no template at all.

So I would say that a lifelong romance offers tangible benefits over courtesans, but that not everyone has the spiritual capacity to reach that stage of sexual being. This bears some resemblance to the example Ayn Rand gave of the best art not being appreciable by the least intelligent people. It does not make them "bad" people, but it does show them as having less ability. But they still have the freedom to enjoy their tabloids or whatever.

I have known too many people -- college roommates primarily -- who totally ignored the spiritual aspects of sexual love to their own detriment. They jumped into bed with women they barely knew and then wondered why the relationships went to hell in a handbasket. At least a paid courtesan relationship has the virtue of honesty on its side, which is more than I can say for the painful hedonistic relationships I saw born and buried over and over again in others. They had the capacity for more if only they had the knowledge and the willingness to act on it.

Post 55

Sunday, December 10, 2006 - 6:42pm

Luke,

Good response! I'm still not sure that prostitution is the best that certain women (or men) can hope for, but you may be right. In certain cases, it might be. I don't know. I'll have to think about it.

- Bill

Post 56

Sunday, December 10, 2006 - 8:01pm

Cheesesteaks, Bonobos, and Surf & Turf

The best and the good are two different things. If the best one could eat were Surf & Turf with truffles but someone really, really loved cheesesteak, would he be immoral not to turn down the latter in place of the former?

Human sexuality as expressed through our rationality can reach the profundity of romantic love. If someone were capable of this, had a suitable partner, and chose masturbation and porn instead, there would be something strange going on. But sexuality itself is a part of our animal nature, Rand notwithstanding. certain sexual strategies found throughout nature include dwarfism - males who sneak in and fertilize a female being courted by a larger and more attractive male, transvestism - males who use the same strategy but avoid aggressive male competition by appearing to be females (think Warren Beatty in "Shampoo") and rapists pure and simple. The number of humans conceived in rape is estimated historically to average almost 5%.

Male homosexual humans tend to mature earlier sexually than other males, and do happen to father children at a statistically significant number. My lover Jay fathered at least two children by women who wanted his child - before he was eighteen. His first experience with a male was a foreigner who found him in Washington Square Park and invited him up to his hotel to make some money.

Few exclusive heterosexuals consider the fact that they did not "have" to be that way, just as few people wonder why they weren't born the opposite sex. Monogamous heterosexuality is a largely successful strategy that is also encouraged by our culture and economic factors. But then again most people on earth have brown eyes.

Finally some people seen to be congenitally disposed toward rape, pedophilia, or sexualized serial murder. This does not mean that these are healthy lifestyles or that they should be approved - the rest of us just happen to be disposed toward jailing or killing such monsters.

One simply cannot argue a priori that Rand's expressed theory of sex - which was a wonderful rationalization (meant in a non-critical sense) of her ideal is necessary everyone's ideal. I would bet that the women in Cathouse happen to have higher than average testosterone levels or some other genetically mediated difference in their natures. Humans vary throughout a wide range of make-ups. Some people just absolutely love cheesesteaks. This is not evil. It is their joy, and they are entitled to it.

The image is from www.primates.com

Ted Keer, 10 December, 2006, NYC

Post 57

Wednesday, December 13, 2006 - 4:57am

for a more positive courtesan model:

- think Galt's Gulch when Dagny takes her first tour - men men men, without a woman in sight (except Kay on stage), pining (and panting) for a woman of ability, of the mind (and Dagny has already exhausted her share, so give her a rest)
- think of a woman who's sexually turned on by ability, creativity (Hank and Dagny always wanting to express their admiration in 'the lowest of physical desires')
- think of a woman who can channel her sexual energy into creativity and ability (the companion from Firefly would suit as an example here)

whore was actually the first job that came to mind (even without much thinking) when I first read AS and pictured myself in GG ... I've reconsidered since: too much work and too little 'after-work opportunities' (for a dyke that is ;)

I've always lusted after the women of ability, of maturity and rarely for the starlets so prevalent in the beauty and sex industry today - they give me a sexual thrill that goes beyond physical touch or physical beauty ... and because these women have been scarce throughout all my life I've channeled much of my sexual energy into ability, creativity ... so the two have become virtually synonymous for me ...

after all: the brain is our biggest sex-organ :)
beats the courtesan of the tragic past putting one over useless men ;)

VSD

Post 58

Thursday, December 14, 2006 - 12:01pm

Wow! Lots of thought-provoking stuff in this thread. Don't get HBO, hence no Cathouse. Overall, re the psychological 'health' (or 'maturity'?) of prostitutes, I do believe distinctions need to be made 'twixt those working for 'bosses' (madams/pimps/escort-services/'masseuers') required to do some things with some that they'd prefer to not, and those 'free-lancing.' Further, of the free-lancers, those who are street-walkers vs. client-picking high-priced call-'girls' may be a distinction relevent here. The psychology of the 'group' called prostitutes clearly cannot be considered equivalent amongst all members.

LLAP
J:D

Post 59

Thursday, December 14, 2006 - 12:10pm