Thursday, August 27, 2015

One of the boys

There’s a good reason you don’t know your coworkers’ wages and benefits. The rivalry and envy such comparisons invoke would kill office morale, especially for men, for whom buying power corresponds with sexual capital, or his potential for love, marriage, and family, through which he extends the horizons of life beyond limited, short-lived sexual impulse. George Gilder writes in Wealth and Poverty:

Money so profoundly shapes the prospects of our lives, our position in the community, our attractiveness to friends; because money is a primary index of value in capitalist society; because it is the key arbiter of status, to flaunt our riches is to assert our superiority in a way beyond easy appeal.


The man’s earnings, unlike the woman’s, will determine not only his standard of living but also his possibilities for marriage and children—whether he can be a sexual man. The man’s work thus finds its deepest source in love.

An argument between two men over who makes more money is impolite enough. It’s the equivalent of butting heads for sexual supremacy in the herd. It’s perverse when a woman butts heads with a man.

“I think I actually make two to three times more than he does per second ... so when he learns to read and write, he can text me,” [Rousey] said in the TMZ video while out walking her dog.

When pressed by TMZ on whether she makes more than Mayweather does, Rousey responded, “Yeah, I’m just more efficient.”

Put aside that Rousey isn’t factoring the thousands of hours of training and preparation in her per-second earnings in the octagon. We know why money is important to Mayweather. Let’s not assume it’s equally important to Rousey. To how many eligible bachelors is her buying power more important than her appearance or her readiness to settle down? She knows her appeal has some foundation in her attractiveness, so her aggressiveness towards Mayweather comes off as unfeminine and gratuitous. Perhaps her capitalistic utility is unattractive in the sense that it puts her out of most men’s league. Even if you make $100,000 a year, how are you going to maintain the attention of a jet-setting woman worth $10 million?

Camille Sold makes £10 an hour, but that matters not a whit to her £25-million soccer star boyfriend.

The management and marketing student from Strasbourg, who began dating her countryman earlier this year, was pictured at work wearing a United shirt with his squad number 28 and her first name.

She earns £15,000-a-year working on the tills and the shopfloor of the store, whereas the midfielder, 25, pockets more than £5 million, according to The Sun.

If he loves her and she sensibly parlays his affection into long-term commitment, she will command a greater fortune than Rousey has earned on her own. So, who is in a better position? The fighter who makes “$100,000 per second” in the octagon, or the woman whose rich husband loves her? Just saying, earning doesn’t mean the same thing to women as it does to men. In the game of life, typically men compete for status, women compete for men.

1 comment:

  1. Extremely well-said, and -reasoned, Mr. Dooley!

    It's a real pleasure to read you. Your candor is so refreshing, and I have to admit you serve as an example for me. I'm going to try to emulate your gentle, but firm and unflinching style into my own writing.

    I much appreciate what you do and how you do it.


    -- x