What is Sexual Capital?

Product Information

The term erotic capital was first used by British sociologist Catherine Hakim in the early 2000s. Hakim defined it as separate from and building upon French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu's concepts of economic, cultural, and social capital. She says erotic capital is independent of class origin and enables social mobility, and argues that this makes erotic capital socially subversive, which results in the prevailing power structures devaluing and trying to suppress it. [3] In the manosphere, the parallel term sexual market value or its abbreviation SMV is often used. [4] Definition [ edit ] Economic [ edit ] For more, see Green, Adam Isaiah (2013). "Erotic Capital and the Power of Desirability: Why 'Honey Money' is a Bad Collective Strategy for Remedying Gender Inequality". Sexualities. 16 (1–2): 137–158. doi: 10.1177/1363460712471109. S2CID 143070896.

Martin, John Levi; George, Matt (2006). "Theories of Sexual Stratification: Toward an Analytics of the Sexual Field and a Theory of Sexual Capital". Sociological Theory. 24 (2): 107–132. doi: 10.1111/j.0735-2751.2006.00284.x. S2CID 144177617. Archived from the original on 2013-01-05. Sexual capital is closely associated with race or racial stereotypes of sexual attractiveness. [18] Green, Adam Isaiah (1 September 2011). "Playing the (Sexual) Field: The Interactional Basis of Systems of Sexual Stratification". Social Psychology Quarterly. 74 (3): 244–266. doi: 10.1177/0190272511416606. ISSN 0190-2725. S2CID 145534038.

Project MUSE Mission

What is Sexual Capital? sets up an ambitious query and offers bold, illuminating answers. With historical evidence and incisive theoretical logic, Kao, Grace; Balistreri, Kelly Stamper; Joyner, Kara (1 November 2018). "Asian American Men in Romantic Dating Markets". Contexts. 17 (4): 48–53. doi: 10.1177/1536504218812869. ISSN 1536-5042. S2CID 70349580. Hakim, Catherine (2011). Erotic Capital: The Power of Attraction in the Boardroom and the Bedroom. Basic Books. pp.16–18. ISBN 978-0465027477. Martin, John Levi; George, Matt (2006). "Theories of Sexual Stratification: Toward an Analytics of the Sexual Field and a Theory of Sexual Capital". Sociological Theory. 24 (2): 107–132. doi: 10.1111/j.0735-2751.2006.00284.x. S2CID 144177617. Archived from the original on 5 January 2013.

Illouz and Kaplan note an interesting realisation: the current discussion on sexual identities overlooks an important problem – namely the fact that the ability to benefit from sexual capital unequally distributed across society. Self-employed, creative professions in particular are subject to the performance pressure of sexual capital. A theory, therefore, that every freelance artist should engage with for their own benefit!« Sarah Pines, Die literarische Welt a b c Green, Adam Isaiah (2014). Sexual Fields: Toward a Sociology of Collective Sexual Life. University of Chicago Press. Farrer, James C. (2010). "A foreign adventurer's paradise? Interracial sexuality and alien sexual capital in reform era Shanghai". Sexualities. 13 (1): 69–95. doi: 10.1177/1363460709352726. S2CID 144501924. Hakim, Catherine (2010). "Erotic capital". European Sociological Review. 26 (5): 499–518. doi: 10.1093/esr/jcq014. S2CID 198118608. Hamermesh, Daniel S; Meng, Xin; Zhang, Junsen (1 July 2002). "Dress for success—does primping pay?" (PDF). Labour Economics. 9 (3): 361–373. doi: 10.1016/S0927-5371(02)00014-3. ISSN 0927-5371.However, rather than reducing sexual capital to the attractive female body, the authors provide a more contextual understanding of the concept by asking under which socio-historical conditions sexuality has translated into (different forms of) capital for both men and women. The authors present a historical account of sexuality formations that have transformed with a transition from early modern bourgeois societies to today’s neoliberal capitalist societies. In this sense, the authors, despite their Western-oriented perspective, present a compelling alternative to Hakim’s ahistorical conceptualization of sexual capital.

However, as certain social restrictions waned, such as the erosion of laws and norms impeding interracial and interfaith marriages, sexuality became less restricted and increasingly viewed as a source of interpersonal pleasure. In turn, a new sort of rationality emerged wherein sexual capital became intertwined with the domestic household's ability to produce. Production, in this sense, has a double meaning. On one hand, sexual activity should literally reproduce the household (and population) by way of offspring, while at the same time monogamous sexual activity within the marriage should produce docile workers capable of participating more fruitfully in the market economy. If workers, in this case men, are satisfied at home, their fortunes will multiply. Because desirability in a sexual field may depend on more than merely sexual attractiveness, Green (2014) develops the concept, capital portfolio, to capture the particular combination of capitals that make an individual or group more desirable than others. Capital portfolios typically involve a combination of sexual capital with economic, cultural and social capitals. [6] As an example, to the extent that women, on average, value financial resources (i.e., economic capital) in their male partners more than sexual capital, and men value sexual capital more than economic capital in their female partners, so one may conclude that heterosexual women and men seek out distinctive capital portfolios that include a different, gendered balance of capitals. [35] [6] Criticism [ edit ] Research with female sex workers (FSW) shows that communitarian social capital is associated with increased condom use and lower prevalence of sexuallyHakim, Catherine (2011). Erotic Capital: The Power of Attraction in the Boardroom and the Bedroom. Basic Books. pp. 16–18. ISBN 978-0465027477. The study of collective intimate life—including everything from with whom we “hook up” to whom we marry—has been rather devoid of sociological imagination. Sexual capital can be present in both secular and religious settings. Willey has shown that in an Evangelical youth group, sexual and erotic capital still play a role in partner selection. [14] Young adults often find a romantic interest in their church groups, often by choosing a partner who has sought-after traits, or a desirable personal capital portfolio. [14]Within the Evangelical youth groups studied, sexual capital was displayed as virginal capital, in which an individual was considered more romantically desirable by the group when they had not engaged in sexual activity. [14] Additionally, some studies point out how adolescents may reduce their religious involvement around their sexual debut. [28] Pentecostal adolescents in Cape Town were shown to reduce their church attendance in early adulthood, with some resuming their previous attendance after finding a long-term partner. [28] These studies show some of the effects of religion on influencing sexual behavior norms of a community. While limited studies have been conducted on the effects of sexual and erotic capital within other religious communities, much has been written on how religion has shaped human sexuality.

There's plenty of food for thought here, and Kaplan and Illouz offer an important contribution to understanding the socioeconomic function of sex.« Publisher's Weekly Accordingly, I argue that this typology renders the book an invaluable resource that gender/sex(uality) scholars can use to guide their future research. Through its class-based perspective, the book would be also helpful for those interested in the political economy of sex(uality), while it would be an invaluable resource for sociologists who study the embeddedness of economic and social relations into each other with a gendered focus. Green, Adam Isaiah (2008). "The Social Organization of Desire: The Sexual Fields Approach". Sociological Theory. 26: 25–56. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9558.2008.00317.x. S2CID 144338029.

What is Sexual Capital? sets up an ambitious query and offers bold, illuminating answers. With historical evidence and incisive theoretical logic, Dana Kaplan and Eva Illouz uncover the intricate neoliberal mingling of sexuality, economic worth, and social inequality. A compelling book that will inspire future research.« Viviana A. Zelizer, Princeton University While Hakim argues that sexual capital can be exchanged and modified by an individual, this is only possible for the average person in certain sociopolitical contexts. An individual is bounded by their society's views on sex, sexuality and social norms. In some cases, like in a neoliberal secular society, individuals have a wider freedom of choice in how they present their sexuality and eroticism. [36] Bay-Cheng argues that in neoliberal societies, an individual's motivation for their behavior, along with the behavior itself, is used to evaluate their sexual capital. [38] See also [ edit ]