This week I was alerted to the story of a twenty-two year old college graduate who is auctioning off her virginity to pay for graduate school. This story caught my attention and I thought, ya know, I think I’ll write a feminist take on the whole thing to give my many detractors something to call me names for–which ironically usually serves to make my points re sexism better than to debunk them.
San Diego, California native Natalie Dylan says she has received 10,000 bids from men, the highest at the moment being $3.7 million. While this is not the first time even in recent history that a young woman has sold her virginity, it is probably the most public example, and it is fraught with ironies which enhance the contempt I feel for this girl. First of all, she majored in women’s studies and yet fails to see how she is objectifying herself. Add to that, she says she is selling her body so that she can pay for her graduate school education in family therapy of all things. I’m not sure what sorts of patients she expects to get now that nude pictures of her are plastered all over the internet.
What ever happened to FAFSA? Is this not particularly disturbing as she is attempting a degree in higher education which should be something that will chips away at lingering sexism and traditional gender roles-yet to do so she is reverting to damaging gender stereotypes and the “oldest profession in the world”. She is labeling herself a commodity which only makes it ok for men to think of us in the same objectifying terms. It is a strange paradox to me that a female who wants to be educated would revert back to such a primitive view womanhood. I hope this stunt does not encourage other young women to think of their bodies as and sexuality as something you can put a price on. Clearly the idea is catching though, as Ms. Dylan cites her sister’s three week prostitution stint as her source of inspiration. (Mom and Dad must be so proud.)
What also strikes me as strange is that a woman who would maintain her virginity well past the national average age of 17 would be so callous in how she discards of it. I am not one to emphasize the importance of virginity as I think that could reenforce the idea that a woman should be “pure”, at the same time I don’t think anyone should treat their sexual naissance as a commercial opportunity-especially if they have taken pains to preserve it for so long.
I am sure that other people will see this in a different light-I would love to hear other takes on Ms. Dylan’s er um, ambitionss.
I think it’s very post-feminist of her. Isn’t a voluntary objectification of yourself the ultimate exercise of feminism? After all, if objectification is an assertion of power over another, she has achieved total power over herself, right?
You could interpret it that way, but between pundits discussing Senator Clinton’s kankles and the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Ledbetter case I don’t think we’re living in a society that has achieved the sort of gender equality that merits any sort of “post-feminism”. We still endure double standards where boys are players and girls are sluts, so I think that a girl auctioning her body off as if that is her only way to get what she wants reenforces the inequities some of us are still striving to end.
I struggle a lot with how to view choices like these when women make them. On the one hand, I agree in a lot of ways with the concerns that Liz has voiced. The commercial sex industry causes a great deal of harm to a lot of women (and increasingly, young boys). Most of the individuals selling sex are not in a situation like Natalie Dylan’s. Most of them are either street prostitutes or escorts, and they’re working for someone else. They receive little of the money they make, and they are often subject to violence from all sides – from their pimps, their johns, police, and random criminals. Their position, particularly that of street prostitutes, is incredibly vulnerable. Many experienced sexual abuse from family members or friends of family members prior to their entry into the commercial sex trade, and most enter as minors. (For some good information on youth in the commercial sex trade, see http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/215733.pdf). [On a side note, the fact that Natalie Dylan and her sister have both become a part of the sex trade makes me wonder about the possibility of abuse in their past.] It would be difficult to look at the state of the commercial sex trade and the women in it and say with any strong conviction that there’s any good to come out of it.
However, there are many women involved in the sex trade who reject the word “prostitute” and instead take on the title “sex worker,” precisely because they believe that they have chosen to work in this industry for various reasons. They claim a sense of autonomy, an authority over their lives, their money, and their sexual partners that many never had prior to entering the industry. One sex worker stated, “My dad had been molesting me for years, threatening me. I wanted out. Hooking was very liberating. I had control over my life for the first time.” (9 Wm. & Mary J. Women & L. 1, 13 (Fall 2002)). We may want the commodification of women and their sexuality to end, but the reality of the situation is that it’s probably not going to any time soon, and maybe not ever. So, if these women live in a society in which they are already objectified and viewed as commodities, then why not turn that to their benefit? If Natalie Dylan can use what she is already subject to and turn it into $5 million dollars for herself, what is wrong with that? (other than, of course, the legal considerations)
I would argue that the problem with her choice is that, while she may be benefiting from the situtation, she’s taking part in a larger system where many do not benefit. In addition, I would say that she’s lending credence to a belief clung to by many who visit prostitutes that they want to be doing what they’re doing, that it’s a good choice for them. While it may be for some, the truth is that, for most, it is not. And even for those who claim that it is, the rampant drug and alcohol abuse in the industry makes me wonder about whether those in it actually want to be doing what they’re doing. (For a really good look at prostitution in America, go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sq5IM_Ur5FQ. You can watch the entire 20/20 special – I think it has 12 parts and looks at a lot of different facets of the prostitution industry in the US).
The part of Natalie Dylan’s situation that I don’t have any ambivalence about is her exploitation of her own virginity. But I think my reasons are a bit different than Liz’s. Whether someone chooses to “discard” of her virginity in a “callous” manner is of no concern to me – girls do that all the time. What does concern me is that Ms. Dylan is furthering a system that views women’s virginity as a commodity above and beyond all else, as particularly precious. The result of a system like this is inevitably child sexual exploitation. I personally do not understand the desire to have sex with a virgin. But clearly it is there if men are willing to spend $5 million dollars in order to do so. It’s also there all over the United States when thirteen year old girls are lured or kidnapped into the sex industry in order to market them as virgins to those who are looking for that sort of thing. And there are lots of them.
In a conversation that I had with another person about this post, she suggested that Natalie Dylan might talk with young female prostitutes about her choices, about the fact that she is making a choice and is maintaining autonomy. I’m not sure about how much use there would be in what Ms. Dylan would have to say to young prostitutes. But I know there are a lot of organizations that could benefit from a portion of that money. If Ms. Dylan is blessed enough to be able to make a choice like this and not have it forced upon her, then perhaps she might be interested in giving a little to those who haven’t been that fortunate. GEMS in New York, for instance, helps young girls who are trying to escape from the sex industry. HIPS, in DC, provides food, legal assistance, needle exchange, and condoms to street prostitutes. And there are many others that would probably really appreciate even a piece of that money.
There’s so much information and so many discussions to be had on this topic, and I have a lot more that I could say. But I think that might warrant starting a whole new blog devoted to the sex industry.
I think it’s a little dangerous to conflate this woman’s virginity auction with the perils of the sex industry, forced prostitution, child abuse, and what have you. I don’t think this would be a feminism-focused conversation if the body parts for sale were biceps (e.g., for tattoos). So is Natalie’s proposal offensive just because it has to do with her sex parts? Does the fact that she wants to sell her virginity automatically make her a spokesperson for sex workers? Does she really have an obligation to take the situation of exploited thirteen-year-olds in Southeast Asia into account when she decides what to do with her body? It would be foolish for the person who buys Natalie’s virginity to generalize from her situation to that of forced sex slaves in Eastern Europe; but it is equally foolish for us to use the exploitation of unfortunate people in very different and difficult situations to make some sort of moral statement about Natalie’s obvious choice.
I just can’t believe that this San Diego girl has the future of feminism on her mind, or that she should!
Tangentially, Liz said: “She is labeling herself a commodity which only makes it ok for men to think of us in the same objectifying terms.”
Nonono. No. It makes it okay for men to think of her in “objectifying” terms. It is wrong to think that one woman’s actions could–or should–change the way that all men think about all women. That’s an unhealthy, and I think inaccurate, way to think about gender relations. I really think the best thing that can come out of women’s lib is independence: women should be independent from men, and independent from each other, to whatever extent they choose. Your choices should have no bearing on mine–or else what personal choices am I fighting for? Removing one yoke and replacing another is no prize in my book.
Sai, you have a book?
I agree, Sai, that all men should not make opinions about the actions of all women based on the actions of only one woman. However, men who purchase sex acts from sex workers do exactly that all the time. And johns convince themselves that sex workers actively choose their employment when told much less believable stories than this one. In fact, explaining to men that women involved in sex work very rarely have other feasible alternatives is one of the central lessons of John’s Schools (schools offered in lieu of a harsher penalty after being arrested for solicitation).
I also agree that it is unfair to make this woman take on all of the issues we are doling out to her. However, she is a woman and this sort of hugely publicized act (and she never intended for it to be a discrete exchange) does affect women generally. It is unfair to blame her for the not-quite-so-equal status of women, but, if we don’t discuss it in larger terms, it is a disservice to the women out there who don’t have the luxury of loans and a higher education when they make their “choice” to join the sex industry.
I believe that Natalie Dylan has every right to do with her body as she will, including selling her sexual naivete to the highest bidder. This sale does, however, validate still-held, but archaic notions of women as commodities and of virginity as purity.
“It is wrong to think that one woman’s actions could–or should–change the way that all men think about all women. That’s an unhealthy, and I think inaccurate, way to think about gender relations.”
i think the argument is not that this is the right way to think about things but the fact of the matter is that this is how many people do. The issue seems to be if this is reinforcing this way of thought or moving past it, I don’t think anyone is arguing this is the way people should look at one woman’s action.
Several of the other commenters have made the basic points that I wanted to make about whether Ms. Dylan’s actions have an effect on the situations of other women.
I still want to answer one point that Sai made, though. I alluded to the situation of 13-year old girls in my comment, and Sai then commented about these girls as being from Southeast Asia or Eastern Europe.
Sai, I think your argument on that point might have been operating from a common misconception about child sexual exploitation. (Disclosure: I spent three months last semester researching domestic child sexual exploitation and the failure of US laws to adequately address that issue.) It has only been in the last 3-4 years that US policy regarding human trafficking has begun to account for the high numbers of domestically trafficked individuals, including children in the sex trade industry. Some of the US’s policy change was based on research done by Richard Estes and Neil Weiner (out of UPenn), who spent several years determining what exactly is the situation with regard to domestic (as opposed to the international) child sexual exploitation. They found that there are approximately 300-400,000 children living in the United States involved in the commercial sex industry. They’re not just children who have been trafficked into the United States – their research showed children of every racial makeup, economic background, and geographic area, although the majority of children most at risk are homeless. It’s not just a problem elsewhere. It’s a US problem.
And even the parts of the problem that exist elsewhere – like Southeast Asia and Eastern Europe – are a US problem. Federal legislation has focused in large part on increasing the penalties for US citizens who travel to these areas to engage in “sex tourism.” These trips are often focused on setting up sexual encounters with young virgins.
Finally, much research into child sexual exploitation has focused on the dynamic that exists between a pimp or madame and the children that they “employ.” Since the average age of entry into the sex industry in the United States is 13-14 years old (for girls), these pimps and madames develop strategies by which they lure these young girls into the commercial sex industry.
Estes and Weiner lay out a common pattern: “The most common approach is for the pimp to befriend a homeless child, express affection for the child and spend what appears to the child to be lavish sums of money buying the child clothes, jewelry, meals, video games, and the like. Sex between the pimp and child is taken for granted. In time, the pimp uses the child’s emotional (and by now financial) dependency to persuade the child into selling sex for money (all of which is turned over to the pimp). In time, the arrangement becomes less emotional and more contractual as the pimp demands that the child
produce some minimum amount of money daily (the amount of which varies from a few hundred
dollars to several thousand dollars a day depending on locale and what other prostitutes
in the same community are earning).” [available at http://www.sp2.upenn.edu/~restes/CSEC_Files/Complete_ CSEC _020220.pdf].
While we can argue about whether Ms. Dylan SHOULD take into account the effects of her actions on anyone else, the fact of the matter is that the glamorization of her choice to sell her virginity for incredible amounts of money and stories like hers increase the chances that a young girl will believe a pimp when he approaches her and tells her that if she listens to him, she can have a wonderful, glamorous life.
“So is Natalie’s proposal offensive just because it has to do with her sex parts?”
Yes. That makes it different. Selling your body to do manual labor, or to be part of a medical or scientific experiment is different than selling your body for sex. While sex may be treated as a commodity, it is not a commodity without emotional ramifications. That is why most prostitutes were sexually abused before they became prostitutes. That is why there is a remarkably high incidence of drug and alcohol abuse among people who are sex workers, whether they sell sex willingly or not.
While I think feminism and female independence can change a lot of things, I don’t think they can change the emotional aspect of sex.
On a separate note, I agree with Sai that we should not allow feminism or post-feminism or any other ism to replace misogyny or paternalism in terms of controlling women’s lives. But that doesn’t mean that women shouldn’t be aware of the consequences of their actions and how the way that they behave and invite others to treat them has consequences for all women. It’s not the way it should be, it’s not ideal, but it’s reality. I appreciate your Ayn Rand individualism and hope that one day we live in that world. But while we still live in a world that is rife with violence against women and sexual violence against women, young girls and young boys, it is naive to think that Natalie Dylan’s actions don’t affect the way many men view women.
Okay, I’ll bite.
You say:
While this is not the first time even in recent history that a young woman has sold her virginity, it is probably the most public example, and it is fraught with ironies which enhance the contempt I feel for this girl. First of all, she majored in women’s studies and yet fails to see how she is objectifying herself.
You’re basically saying that you feel contempt for Natalie Dylan because she is a women’s studies major and yet disagrees with how you think she should act. Should all women’s studies majors agree with you?
And then you say:
I am not one to emphasize the importance of virginity as I think that could reenforce the idea that a woman should be “pure”,
You seem to be suggesting that virginity is unimportant and not deserving of attention and at the same time expressing your contempt for a young woman who is making (apparently carefully thought out) plans to lose her, while at the same time you say:
What also strikes me as strange is that a woman who would maintain her virginity well past the national average age of 17 would be so callous in how she discards of it.
Hello! You just said that virginity has no value! So which one is it? Is virginity unvaluable because any attachment of value to sexuality would enforce concepts of purity and justify subjugation of women? Or is it that virginity really IS valuable and any woman who attempts to sell hers is doing something that is “callous” because it requires an effort to protect (according to you) and therefore you find her worthy of your contempt and believe that her parents are not proud of her?
Perhaps your ravings are just sour grapes?
It seems to me to be a very feminist thing to do. On the one hand, she kept her virginity (I’ll non-cynically assume that she did not plan to sell it all along, but rather she just never met the right guy) which is highly valued by the patriarchy. On the other she’s getting rid of it in a morally questionable manner. I think she is doing this for a two reasons:
1. It is a social experiment (one that only a woman’s studies major would think up, IMO) to empirically put a value on virginity. She’s a very attractive woman, and I bet she figured there was a chance she might get a lot of attention, which with the power of the internet means a lot of bidders. By having some stupid Australian guy want to pay several million dollars for something likely already “taken” by a tampon or horseback riding very clearly shows how silly it is to put such a high value on something like virginity.
2. I think it’s also a statement about the ridiculous cost of higher education today.
I was under the impression that she had already taken out loans to finance her education and that this was a quick way to repay them. (I also dare to say that we might be able to relate to this sentiment given the amount of loans we’ll have when we graduate).
That being said, it seems like the easy way out, whereas most of us (unless you go to Michigan, apparently) will pay back our loans quickly by working 80 hour weeks or pay them back slowly with a public interest job.
Given that choice, this girl realizes that she possesses something of great value to others. If she decides that giving away her virginity to a stranger is worth her education (not completely irrational), then who are we to judge her decision? This girl is obviously not a slut, given the fact that she’s managed to maintain her virginity all through college, so I find it difficult to judge her as undermining the fight for gender equality.
I do not think that this girl would be undermining the fight for gender equality simply by having sex while in college. In fact, I think most women’s sex lives have minimal impact on gender equality. It is our attitudes about sex that affect the fight, not our participation.
For example, I think the term “slut” is much more dangerous to the goal of gender equality than any one girl’s sexual experiences in college, no matter how many people she slept with.
It is not the fact that she has not had sex or that she is going to have sex that undermines our fight. It is the fact that she is playing into the glorification of virginity, that she is volunteering herself as a commodity, and that she is doing all of this so very publicly that feels like a betrayal to the feminist cause.