Last night as I was teaching a Macro course, covering GDP in the usual way (what it purports to measure and how; what is not measured, what is difficult or impossible to quantify; real vs nominal; how it is used/misused; GDP vs GNP; National Income Accounting; the usual) which I approach like a born-again true-capitalist to the core, then we slid from that which is nominally "non-commodified" and not included, into capitalism and commodification. I asked the males in the class how many go to or have gone to a "meat market" bar. Almost all raised their hands. I asked the males how many have gone with the specific intent to "score" or pop some woman--or man--into the sack with minimum expenditure of time and money. A bunch of them raised their hands. I asked how many had heard the "Tom Leykis Philosophy" (Tom Leykis, for the uniniated, is a moron with a national talk show from LA 3-7 pm PT with high ratings largely because his regular listeners are even more moronic; he advocates: dating is to get laid, his show is to show guys how to get laid, never spend more than $40 to get laid, never date single mothers as you will wind-up paying palomony for someone else's kids, never go past one date if not getting laid on the first date, he advises women 'how men think', women are gold diggers so lying to get laid is quite appropriate and necessary etc). Several raised their hands. Then I asked the women in the class how many go to or have gone to a "meat market" bar to meet someone with the hopes of higher--or perhaps lower--levels of interpersonal "communication". Several raised their hands. I then asked how many women who have met males--or fellow females--would consider something more (getting laid or forming a relationship) with someone unemployed, on welfare or looking to become a "Mr. Mom" and be supported by a working woman while he/she stayed at home and ate bon bons watching Judge Judy etc. None raised their hands. We then go into a discussion about objectification, reification and commodification. When one objectifies and commodifies another, does one not also objectify/commodify himself/herself? When one sets a "price" for favors etc is not another price being set for accepting and capitalizing on those favors? What happens when a system commodifies everything--everything is for sale? What happens when something is produced for sale rather than use and there is no market or demand? What happens when something vital is for sale but no one who needs it has the purchasing power to buy it (e.g food for infants etc?) What happens when "justice" is for sale--i.e. what happens when if one has enough money and slick lawyers, one can stab his former wife and someone returning her sunglasses, while sitting in jail for less than two years can publish and profit from a book full of lies, get acquitted despite irrefutable evidence, keep custody of his kids (what does murdering the mother of the kids have to do with "parenting skills"?) and go on playing golf and claiming $300,000 year despite a civil judgment for $34 million while on the other hand, the poor unable to afford any kind of real defense, wind up in prison or even on death row despite irrefutable evidence they didn't do the alleged crime? What happens when medical care is for sale and those who argue they are "pro-life" (meaning pro-birth anti-abortion) are also in the vanguard against socialized medicine and against comprehensive access to quality medical care which also--and in real ways-- involves the "right to life"? What happens when the government and the scope/content/intent of laws are for sale? What happens when resource allocation is based on profitability prospects rather than mass needs, and dope and kiddy porn appear to be "highly profitable" while dialysis machines, housing for the poor, 'education' etc are considered not to be "highly profitable" given a very limited, class-based and sick calculus of "profitability" and "real" costs versus "real" benefits? Or, what is the difference between a woman sitting in a window in Amsterdam advertising her specialties (whips and chains, manage a trois etc) and: Attractive natural blond SWF 25, hot with the right guy, seeks SWM 30-50 for lifelong partnership and marriage, must be financially secure, must be muscular, must not be bald, prefer brown or black hair and blue or hazel eyes, must be Protestant and God-fearing, must enjoy outdoors and classical music, must love cats, must enjoy global travel and able to afford luxury accomodations, no pre-nuptual agreements, must have own home etc etc. Send recent photo, phone number and resume to Tiffany who will contact the 5 finalists out of the submissions? We got quite a discussion going. Of course I have my own "express lane" to the Dean's office. Jim C James Craven Clark College, 1800 E. McLoughlin Blvd. Vancouver, WA. 98663 (360) 992-2283; Fax: (360) 992-2863 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.home.earthlink.net/~blkfoot5 *My Employer Has No Association With My Private/Protected Opinion*
