Catherine Hakim - author of Honey Money - struggles to explain the difference between "erotic capital" and "sexual capital" to Zoe Williams in The Guardian.
"Erotic capital... divides into six categories," Williams summarises, "beauty; sexual attractiveness; social skills like grace, charm and discreet flirtation; liveliness, which is a mixture of physical fitness, social energy and good humour; social presentation, including dress, jewellery and other adornments; and finally, sexuality itself, competence, energy, imagination."
Williams calls the above quote "a homophobic rant" - I'm not so sure, and really don't think it's that contentious a statement.
You don't agree?
How do you explain this then?
The book looks like a load of pseudo-scientific nonsense on a stick, though.
Social pseudo-science books seem to be selling very well these days, I notice.
Will Self reviews Hakim's book here.
If anyone can figure out what Mr Self makes of it, please let me know.
Thanks.
Posts
Williams calls the above quote "a homophobic rant" - I'm not so sure, and really don't think it's that contentious a statement.
ReplyDeleteYou don't agree?
How do you explain this then?
So, every gay person in the world is on gaydar?
'So, every gay person in the world is on gaydar?'
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry, when did I say this, pls?
She says "In the gay community this is ABSOLUTELY the case".
ReplyDeleteYou put forward Gaydar as proof of what she says.
But unless the entire gay community is on gaydar or rutting in cottages up and down the country, I don't see how it supports what she says.
Her point is clearly crap and it's prejudice in its most basic form. She's tarring us all with the same brush.
It's bilge, Fagburn. And what's more it's balderdash...
Why is there not an amazingly successful Straightdar, pls?
ReplyDeleteCan you promise me you will put all your life savings into starting one, pls?
Thank you. :)
How many of gaydar's members are closeted gay men?
ReplyDeleteThere's one major reason why a straight version wouldn't be anywhere near as successful.
There's all sorts of reasons why a straight gaydar wouldn't be as successful, I don't have to spell it out...
How many of gaydar's members are either closeted straight men or gay teenagers who sign up out of curiosity but never actually meet up with anyone on there?
Quite a substantial proportion I would guess.
Gaydar's membership numbers shouldn't be taken as a reliable indicator of how many gay men meet up for random sex.
But you're dodging the point: her exact words were "In the gay community this is ABSOLUTELY the case" and that's indefensible. She's either a homophobe or she's an idiot, but either way she's trying to pass off an opinion which is clearly false as scientific fact.
She used "absolutely" as a turn of phrase, not a scientific term...
ReplyDeleteYou don't know how she intended the term any more than I do, but she's a "Senior Research Fellow in Sociology" at the LSE, so we have to assume she not only knows the importance of using the right words, but is well aware of what she's saying when she says that "the only thing that matters is sexual attractiveness... In the gay community this is absolutely the case."
ReplyDeleteYou seem to be giving her the benefit of the doubt on the basis that she's an idiot and didn't realise how the words she used could be interpreted (unless of course she meant exactly what she seems to suggest).
Fair enough - but it doesn't change the fact that what she says is bullshit and obviously so...
Your turn!
I always try and be nice to idiots, yes.
ReplyDeleteAs well you know. :)
:D
ReplyDeletex
PS - she's a feminist, apparently. So it's hardly surprising. Not all women are homophobic of course, but in the feminist community this is absolutely the case... :(
knob.
ReplyDelete