Transactional Sex…

Transactional Sex

It’s everywhere

   

 

And nooooo

I don’t mean prostitution.

The actuality of “sex for money” (or sex for advancement), “transactional sex”, is pretty accepted behavior universally, EVERYWHERE. And it always has been: it’s all around us daily, for centuries and centuries, for all of recorded time apparently.

You doubt me, you look at these statements askance, ALAS~ but really now, seriously, that behavior is all around us, and from time immemorial too; just let me expound a bit. Isn’t the whole concept of historical Judeo/Christian marriage, where the MAN brings home the bacon (sic), and provides all of the workday effort (at least prior to the Women’s Lib movement in the 1960’s): funds, security, and shelter in life, SURVIVAL, for the woman…

… so that the woman can provide SEX, and of course…

children… ad infinitum.

Ain’t this the time immemorial entire raison d’être for marriage?

      

Yea… marriage as “transactional sex…”

I can go way back in history, to Ancient History, to pre-Judeo/Christian times even, and then come up through the ages from there with justification for this line of thought…

“Antony and Cleopatra” as a love story…Nah…

Antony and Cleo were a failed attempt, by two doomed individuals, at a dynastic alliance to take over the world as it was known at the time…

Sing out:

“What’s Love Got To Do With It…” … or:

“All Or Nothing At All…”And they got nothing…

To continue, and up the seriousness quotient a bit, I’ll quote from an online Psychology Today magazine article that gives this train of anecdotal societal rambling the intellectual heft it needs. The PT article is based on the writings of the respected clinical research director, historian, and family scholar, Stephanie Coontz, and was first published in PT in 2005, and then reviewed in 2016.

How’s this for the fidelity, purity, and monetization of ancient “love” as spake by Psychology Today:

“Antiquity – Renaissance:

What’s love got to do with it?

In early history, politics and money trumped emotions.

Ancient Greece: … In marriage, inheritance is more important than feelings: A woman whose father dies without male heirs can be forced to marry her nearest male relative — even if she has to divorce her husband first.

Rome: Wife-swapping as a career move — Statesman Marcus Porcius Cato divorces his wife and marries her off to his ally Hortensius in order to strengthen family bonds; after Hortensius dies, Cato remarries her.

6th – century Europe: Political polygamy — The Germanic warlord Clothar, despite being a baptized Christian, eventually acquires four wives for strategic reasons…  

12th – century Europe:  Marriage is good for loving… someone else — Upper-class marriages are often arranged before the couple has met. Aristocrats believe love is incompatible with marriage and can flourish only in adultery.

14th – century Europe: It takes a village — Ordinary people can’t choose whom to marry either. The lord of one Black Forest manor decrees in 1344 that all his unmarried tenants — including widows and widowers — marry spouses of his choosing. Elsewhere, peasants wishing to pick a partner must pay a fee.”

And on into the Victorian era, more from Psychology Today:

“18th – century Europe: …  Ladies’ debating societies declare that while loveless marriages are regrettable, women must consider money when choosing a partner.”

   

And now about that fee in the modern age…

Today, there’s the all-pervading sense (at least to me), that the power couples of the present come together for other reasons than love… (like in the Victorian era, or Greece, or Rome…). Just like Kimmy K married Kris Humphries (above), for material gain, and that wedding netted MILLIONS, her divorce from Kris 72 days later, and her second marriage to replacement husband, Kanye West, netted more…

Kimmy is about to birth, or just recently birthed, their child number three (hers and Kanye’s), through a surrogate mother; so maybe this time Kimmy didn’t even “know” the pecker… But their combined media empire (Kimmy’s and Kanye’s), hyped it all; HYPE for their mutual economic benefit…

And what of Queen Bee Beyonce and her MMM (Mighty Music Mogul) husband Jay Z, and the merchandising of her recent pregnancy, and of their newborn “Beyonce Twins”

Or what of the long-term marriage of Kris Kardashian/Jenner and Bruce, ne/Caitlyn, Jenner?

      

Oh what a “love”/family life those two must have had all those years together. Who could visually posit what went down there, in that “love” nest, daily:

What…

“We’s gonna get together, swap spit, bump pussies, and giggle?”

Or what? 

Just what…

But what a mega fortune that marriage in Media/Money Heaven accrued for those two.

What a mega fortune…

And before all of them above, what of:

Doris and Rock in the 1950’s when a movie star had to be INVOLVED with a member of the opposite sex (Doris Day, and Rock Hudson…) …

… and what of the tumultuous marriage of Lucy and Desi (the revered Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz).

As John Kander and Fred Ebb said in Cabaret, that legendary Broadway Musical from 1966:

Money, Money, Money…

“If you happen to be rich
And you feel like a night’s entertainment
You can pay for a gay escapade.
If you happen to be rich and alone
And you need a companion
You can ring (ting-a-ling) for the maid.”

Ask a successful older person if they have ever used their money, or their high position, to impress a younger person for personal gain, be it sexual conquest, simple momentary attention, or other interpersonal dalliance. Or, on the other side, ask a very beautiful, or handsome, youth, if they have ever used their physical attributes for advancement with an older individual. But do either as an anonymous exercise. It has to be an anonymous query as I doubt if the people involved will tell the truth about their actions here.

People will lie as this is VERY personal shit, and embarrassing to many, so people will lie about their actions. But these actions are so ubiquitous, so “EVERYDAY common, as to be completely UNNOTICEABLE in 99% of its daily occurrences. And all the participants involved will lie about what has occurred to not call attention to their “onerous” behavior…

 “NO! …

Not me…

Never would I…” 

 

But it happens every minute of the day.

This isn’t just a male thing you know; women do it too, and throughout history; it’s been immortalized in popular song, “Bewitched, Bothered, and Bewildered” from the Broadway Musical Pal Joey was sung in performance by a wily, horny, wealthy, grand dame who was pining away for her penniless younger swain…

While in Stephen Sondheim’s more recent, penultimate, Broadway Musical, Follies… 

 

… a female lead sings lovingly to her adoring (sic), philandering, and somewhat abusive (psychologically), husband (who she married for money…), the song “Could I Leave You”:

“Could I leave you?
No, the point is, could you leave me?
Well, I guess you could leave me the house,
Leave me the flat,
Leave me the Braques and Chagalls and all that.
You could leave me the stocks for sentiment’s sake
And ninety percent of the money you make.”

And of course our heroine above had found sexual release previously in the arms of a younger man before this aural outburst; just like in Victorian England of before…

“Could I bury my rage
With a boy half your age
In the grass? Bet your ass.
But I’ve done that already — or didn’t you know, love?”

So if it ain’t about money, and:

…  “what can you do for me lately”

… what is it about…

Apparently all male/female, and same sex, sexual relationships, and marriage, are “transactional relationships” at some point…

ALL OF THEM!

Today, as always before, youthful paramours pay for ice cream sodas, or some other sweet folly, for the attention of their desired other…

(“can I carry your backpack…)

  

… so that they might get kissed (or more…), by the affection (or affliction), of their current moment in time.

And men frequently buy cocktails when they first meet their attraction du jour in a bar, or lounge. If a guy doesn’t reach for his wallet and pony-up cash real quick for those first libations, he don’t get no chance to pony-up the bigger dollars for dinner down the road; and with no dinner, perhaps to miss an opportunity to really…

     

SCORE!

And of course if that dinner goes well that next time the two are together, and dessert afterwards is rewarding to all, and the man has the opportunity for more meals, more desserts…

HE MIGHT GET THE OPPORTUNITY TO PAY FOR SEX FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE!

At least that’s how it was before Women’s Liberation, and the 1960’s.

  

Just sayin truth am I.

Nah…

I ain’t just “sayin truth”; I’ve quoted the experts…

I gotz me a prima facie case here.

“Prima facie”

And as the true, red blooded, American, romantic, male that I am, this transactional stuff: money for sex

marriage

… makes me sick …

(Love me for who I am…

 

… only…

Only

only...)

Love, Life, Money, SEX; Power in America 2018…

Onwards…

Ever onwards…

onwards…

Me too…

me too…

I wonder how the “ME TOO” movement percolating merrily along today will affect the above. All those guilty of sexual harassment, and unsolicited, unwanted, “sexual transactions” are to be exposed and dismembered forthwith. All heinous, bad behavior, to female kind (and other), obliterated ever more… And finally, some 50 years after the birth of the modern Women’s Liberation movement justice will be done; the guilty will be vanquished, and peace, sexual equality, economic equality, and tranquility between the sexes (and all individuals), will reign supreme in all the land.

Except, just some months ago, a strong plurality of women, if not “Me Too” compatriots exactly, voted in the Chief Perpetrator of Heinous Assaults on Womankind, Mr. “Grab Em by the Pussy” Donald Trump, into the highest office of the land. At the same time, that same female plurality gave control of 69% of the Statehouses and Governorships of America to The Donald’s “Family Values”, CHRISTIAN, Republican Party.

The whole transactional sex marriage/religious “fundamentalist” enchilada in one place so to speak…

All in one pot…

“Me Too” today, “Me Too” tomorrow, the majority of those REPUBLICAN power brokers ain’t going away; not before the next election certainly, and who knows if even then. History kind of supports the fact that a lot of women vote for these people, and support them often, year, after year, after year…

After year…

   

The jury is still out on the charges against all of the perpetrators still in power, not all claims of injustice are equal, nor are all reactions to the differing crimes the same…

In fact. “many people” are looking at, and for, distinctions within the “Me Too” hysteria… and there could be blowback, a severe reaction to the steps forward being advocated by many to alleviate what IS a heinous circumstance. But as some in the know say:

And The Donald has at least 3 more years in power, and the Republicans in the Legislatures could win again…

AND SO COULD HE…

Lord knows women have voted for all of them all before, OFTEN; and again, and again.

And again…

And well…

… there’s all that ancient history, all of that past behavior: “the human genome… ?” … 

… all of those past patterns to overcome.

Complicated…

complicated…

complicated…

 

 

Share This
0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.