Re: SEXPLOITATION? What is at stake in Cuba?

["L.Beaver & G.Harley" <foxpoint@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Yoshie wrote:> > >In a possible
> > >emancipated future under communism, with no exploitation &
> > >oppressions based on gender, race, etc., it should be up to people
> > >whether or not they would want to make sex work.
> >
>
Xxxx wrote: > again, unsubstantiated sex work idealism and lefty
libertarianism, sorry! If sex
> work/industry is a capitalist thing (historically speaking as well), it is
> logically incorrect to talk about sex work under socialism. Your logic is 
> faulty.
> We are assuming that under socialism meterial conditons that have given rise 
> to
> sex work under capitalism will and *must* wither away. You are conflating
> socialism with capitalism, as far I can tell.
>
>
> ps: I am not gonna purse this discussion any longer. I think two of Lou's 
> posts
> were clear enough, at least for me. You can contact me privately if you wish. 
> I am
> seriously busy today, because I have to prepare myself for an occasion, 
> cooking
> stuff etc.. so I won't spend my time in front of computer the whole day.

> Xxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxx
> PhD Student
> Department of Political Science
> SUNY at Albany
> Nelson A. Rockefeller College
> 135 Western Ave.; Milne 102
> Albany, NY 12222

Gay writes:
This is disappointing, because you were fuelling a debate that was
pushing Yoshie to produce her usual cogent and enlightening responses in
some pretty muddy waters. The clearest stuff written on this topic is
coming from Yoshie's combination of real-world references and related
Marxist explanations. I love Louis to pieces and usually learn most from
him, but I don't know what you got out of his posts on the topic (other
than the context for the discussion, which is something, but not
everything).

You seem determined to pin a bourgeois feminist label on Yoshie. It
won't stick because her analysis is firmly rooted in class and
materialist history. I sense that your own understanding of the topic is
similarly rooted, but I'm finding your posts harder to follow. Could be
me, not always too bright at following the dots (especially when
negative labels are thrown in without explanation).

Anyhow, I had been meaning to send a post on this and related topics.
You used the term 'Marxist-feminist' in your post to Doyle. I'm hoping
there will be a day when the term Marxist implies 'feminist'. Surely the
study of 'gender' relations or the reproduction of the family comes
under the rubric of Marxism, political economy.  IMHO, anyway!

--gay harley

PS By way of intro, since it's been a couple of years since I ventured
into Marxist cyberspace, the oldtimers will remember me from the days of
spoons, before even M1 and M2 and Thaxis and General, et.al. I usually
work as an office worker, did some graduate work at York in Toronto
(Panitch, Whitaker, etc), and helped out with the Marxist Institute
collective in Toronto till I moved to Halifax in 97.