EROTIC CAPITAL
“Erotic capital” is a term coined by Catherine Hakim in 2010 in Prospect Magazine.
Erotic capital or Sexual capital is the social power an individual or group accrues as a result of their sexual attractiveness and social charm. It enables social mobility independent of class origin because sexual capital is convertible, and may be useful in acquiring other forms of capital, including social capital and economic capital.
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. In the manosphere, the parallel term sexual market value or its abbreviation SMV is often used.
The Power of Attraction in the Boardroom and the Bedroom
Definition3 Criticisms of "Erotic Capital"
The Power of Attraction in the Boardroom and the Bedroom
In 2010, pioneering sociologist Catherine Hakim shocked the world with a provocative new theory: In addition to the three recognized personal assets (economic, cultural, and social capital), each individual has a fourth asset -- erotic capital -- that he or she can, and should, use to advance within society.
In this bold and controversial book, Hakim explores the applications and significance of erotic capital, challenging the disapproval meted out to women and men who use sex appeal to get ahead in life. Social scientists have paid little serious attention to these modes of personal empowerment, despite overwhelming evidence of their importance. In Erotic Capital, Hakim marshals a trove of research to show that rather than degrading those who employ it, erotic capital represents a powerful and potentially equalizing tool -- one that we scorn only to our own detriment.
Definition
Economic
One economic-related definition is based on the human truth capital theory of Gary Becker, and predicts that people invest rationally in exhibiting their sex appeal when they can expect a return on their investments. He defines this as a form of health capital, which is itself a form of individual capital.
Another definition, comes from Capital Portfolio Theory, in which Green argues that sexual capital is part of an individual's overall capital portfolio. An individual can transfer their sexual capital to other forms of capital within Capital Portfolio Theory.
From an economic perspective, having high sexual capital is advantageous, since it can help an individual in multiple aspects of their lives. For example, multiple studies have shown that increased physical attractiveness is correlated with higher incomes after eliminating other factors.
Sociology
Green defines sexual capital as accruing to an individual or group due to the quality and quantity of attributes that he or she possesses which elicit an erotic response in another, including physical appearance, affect and sociocultural styles. Erotic capital is best conceived as a property of the field, and not an individual form of capital.
A second definition is developed by Hakim, treating erotic capital as the fourth personal asset. This definition is a multifaceted combination of physical and social attractiveness that goes well beyond sexual attractiveness that is the focus of the 'fields' perspective. Unlike Green's conception of sexual capital, Hakim's erotic capital is an individual capital with no necessary referent to a field.
Extensive supporting evidence for the concept of sexual capital, defined as beauty, physical attractiveness, and good looks, is provided in Daniel Hamermesh's latest book, Beauty Pays, where he reviews the research evidence on the economic benefits of being attractive in all contexts, including higher education teaching, politics, sales and marketing, and everyday social interaction. Hamermesh assumes these economic benefits must be due to unfair discrimination, a position he takes from Deborah Rhode's book, Beauty Bias, a feminist lawyer's critique of the social benefits that accrue to attractive people, and the disadvantages experienced by unattractive people, most particularly the obese.
Catherine Hakim argues that erotic capital matters beyond the sexual field, and beyond private relationships. Her research suggests that erotic capital is important in the fields of media, politics, advertising, sports, the arts, and in everyday social interaction, and consists of six elements:
- Beauty
- Sexual attractiveness
- Social attractiveness ("grace, charm, social skills in interaction, the ability to make people like you, feel at ease and happy, want to know you and, where relevant, desire you")
- Vivaciousness and energy ("a mixture of physical fitness, social energy, and good humor")
- Social presentation ("style of dress, face-painting, perfume, jewelry, hairstyles, and the various accessories that people carry or wear to announce their social status and style to the world")
- Sexuality ("sexual competence, energy, erotic imagination, playfulness, and everything else that makes for a sexually satisfying partner")
Career fields, taking real estate for example, whose earning potential is reliant upon people “liking you” enough to send their business your way are the places you see this idea taking off. But the question behind it is the morality.
Those people who believe that erotic capital should be taken into consideration also have to support the notion that physical fitness, liveliness, and charm -- among many -- are qualities just as, if not more, important than any real qualifications a candidate has.
Unfair as it seems, in career fields where the most successful people are the ones who can walk the walk and talk the talk, can you blame employers for thinking this way?
According to Hakim, women typically possess more of the aspects that allow them to capitalize on their erotic capital in comparison to men. Subtle changes from the way a woman angles her body while sitting to the dress she wears to the amount of eye contact she makes can change the tone of the meeting.
Men, on the other hand, are more limited, with fewer options as to what they can take advantage of -- although they can still dress up (or down) based on their environment.
Recently, while watching a show called Mindhunter on Netflix, one of the main female leads discusses how to make someone feel comfortable sitting across a table from you. She knew all of the ins and outs; crossing your legs towards your subject, keeping your arms uncrossed and open, making plenty of eye contact in order to show that you are a dominant person and not easily made uncomfortable.
These little changes in the way that you interact with a person make all of the difference not only in how you are perceived physically but also how you are perceived as a social being.
But when it comes to an interview, should how you look be taken more seriously than your academic achievements?
In certain fields, it is. Those fields whose necessary skills can be taught and learned, all the same, are those that typically we see emphasizing the use of erotic capital more and more.
One could easily assume that this is because a majority of those fields are ones that require you to speak well and look good doing it. And in that case, it is more difficult to be taught how to act than how to do a task-- at least in the eyes of those supporters of erotic capital.
The real debate about it is: is it fair? But, as the saying goes oftentimes, life isn’t fair. Those people who were born with outstanding social graces and beauty are winning over those who are educated and academically well-rounded in today's society (in the fields where it means something to be “pretty”). So to those who have both -- well, you have the rest of us beat.
The odyssey online, erotic-capital
3 Criticisms Of "Erotic Capital"
The idea that feminine wiles give women enormous social power (and even that these wiles "outweigh educational qualifications," as Hakim claims in her Prospect article) typically rests on a lot of unexamined assumptions about men, women and sex. Here are some from Hakim's piece:
[W]omen have long excelled at such arts: that's why they tend to be more dressed up than men at parties. They make more effort to develop the "soft skills" of charm, empathy, persuasion, deploying emotional intelligence and "emotional labour."
[S]urveys around the globe find that women over 30 steadily lose interest in erotic games.
This is an implicit rebuttal to feminist thinkers (like Sylvia Walby, Mary Evans, Monique Wittig or most recently Kat Banyard) who argue that men and women are "equal" in their sexual interest, as in everything else. This is obviously not true, which is why it should not surprise us that some women do use sex, and their erotic capital more generally, to get what they want.
It's notoriously difficult to determine people's sexual desire from surveys, and all too easy to make blanket statements like "women make more effort to develop charm." It's certainly true that women can exert sexual influence over men, but to assume that the arrow of influence always goes one way not only ignores the many women under and over thirty who have done dumb shit to fuck a dude, it also reinforces the reductive notion of sex as something women have and men want. This is true for some people some of the time, but it's almost impossible to make the case for "erotic capital" as a major cultural force without some pretty sweeping generalizations.
Though Hakim generously includes some over-40 ladies in her list of erotic-capitalists (notably Michelle Obama and Carla Bruni), it's still true that society views female sexual attractiveness as a depreciating asset. Those "beautiful and elegant women who grace the advertisements for products of all kinds, from cars to detergent" are usually young, and in the case of many high-end fashion models, very young indeed. Hakim even makes the connection between youth and "erotic capital" explicit: "the final element of erotic capital is unique to women: bearing children. In some cultures, fertility is an essential element of women's erotic power." A woman's beauty and attractiveness don't necessarily dim with age, but her ability to a) have kids and b) look like the ladies in car ads certainly do. So really, it makes less sense to think of socially-defined sexiness as "capital" — it's more like a really crappy investment.
Sure, being hot might land you a rich husband, but if he only likes you for your "erotic capital," he could easily leave for someone who has more. And then you're SOL — especially if there's a prenup. And while Hakim makes much of the "beauty premium" by which pretty people are paid more (while oddly downplaying the role of the employer discrimination in this), she doesn't acknowledge the double-bind women can get into in the workplace, in which they find themselves caught between being "too feminine" and "not feminine enough." Any how-to article on dressing for work reveals that breasts are often as much a liability as an asset at the office, and anyone who thinks it's easy for women to flirt — or sleep — their way to the top should look at research showing that focusing on a woman's appearance makes people see her as less competent. The bottom line is that "erotic capital" is all about others' perceptions of women, rather than about things women themselves can do or acquire. That's the main reason "soft power" isn't real power — because when your influence is based on someone else's desire, he's the one who's really in control.
Originally by Anna North Jezebel, 3-reasons-why-erotic-capital-is-bullshit
GALLERIA | ||
|
|
Web 3.0 Satoshi Nakamoto Cryptocurrency Ethereum NFT Merkle Tree El-Salvador eNaira
Home/ Info/ Products/ Metaverse Price list/ PC Buyers Guide/ Technology Videos/ Venus Project/ Contact
|
Copyright ©| DAGALLERIA Privacy Policy. | Terms and Conditions apply | All rights reserved.