I need to apologize for my use of the word “whore” two posts back. We need epithets that aren’t sexually loaded when we don’t mean to apply them to women. Without them we just demean all women when we want to get at one or the people behind the one. The woman in question is being used at least as much as she is using us. Listen to this from a reader:
“The term "whore" is objectionable to me all by itself, even when not applied to anyone, but just as a concept that stands for evil intent and moral corruption. A woman has a right to use her body as she sees fit and it can't be helped that men are ravenous for women's bodies so why not take advantage of the male weakness? Women who want to accept money for sexual favors ought to be allowed to do so without being equated to the lowest form of life on earth. I'm not saying that the woman in the ad is not selling something precious for money. She is, it's just that what she's selling, and distorting/corrupting, doesn't belong to her, but to everyone on earth and she has no right to sully it with lies and profiteering. If she were selling her own body I'd say, ‘Hey I don't want to see that on tv’ but couldn't fault her for conspiring to destroy the earth. Whoring is an honorable profession. There are plenty worse things that could be said about the oil spokesperson.”
Everything is overly sexualized in our fundamentally repressed society. Partly this is just a human problem. But partly it is a cynical use of sexuality and attractiveness by corporate elites and their advertisers, who want to control us or manipulate us into wanting what they are selling. When you combine oil, coal, and subtle sexuality, and our reliance on all three – wow, what a combo. I don’t know what to call them. There aren’t any words strong enough to express my disgust.