Porn Perspectives

The indomitable entrepreneurial spirit of Heidi Fleiss strikes again, and the former madame has announced plans to open a "Stud Farm" in the Nevada desert (employment opportunities available, FYI). Fleiss is convinced there is an untapped market of women willing to pay for sex.

While I applaud the concept (and Fleiss is certainly no amateur when it comes to understanding markets), I have to admit to some initial skepticism. This may appear lopsided as I predicate my entire position on pornography on the belief that women will happily pay for pornography, if it's a decent enough product.

Nonetheless, I had to work through some visceral repulsion before I could endorse Fleiss' venture. To start, huge differences separate paying for porn from paying for sex. Women are the mistresses of heterosexual intercourse (and the world might recognize this if women would claim their rightul ownership instead of cowering under insecurity and a demeaning obsession with "goodness"). Porn inhabits a totally different world. Even though most people conflate porn and sex, watching porn is not the same as having sex (which is why I can condone sexism, racism and the like when they are relegated exclusively to a space of sexual fantasy). They are qualitatively different experiences.

Since I believe in female sexual power, it was tough to swallow (so to speak) the idea of women paying men to have sex with them. We can get it whenever want, right? So how can it be ok for women to subvert this natural order, and act as though we can't?

Here's how: Thorstein Veblen. Or rather, the phenomenon he coined conspicuous consumption, which describes lavish spending on goods and services for the mere purpose of displaying wealth.  Diamond-encrusted cell phones, absurdly expensive cars, and (proving it's all relative to a given society) a second child for Chinese families are all examples.   

Following this (il)logic, in a society where women have little trouble getting laid, and are earning more than ever before, the best way to flaunt both wealth and sexuality is to pay for it. It is an interesting turn of events, since it was not so long ago that the best a woman could do was be a symbol of conspicuous consumption (see "trophy wife").

Fleiss has once again found a market where none was thought to exist. She has imagined the ultimate vacation for wealthy LA socialites--a women can grab a couple girlfriends for a weekend outside Vegas at a luxurious spa providing massages, facials (of all kinds) and endless sex with hot men. Decadence embodied, no?

I'm not going to say this exactly helps feminism, but I'm certainly not going to begrudge women a little decadence. Now the question is whether Fleiss will be able to navigate Nevada law and get this little shangri-la up and running.