This question <215|228> overall <216|219> Pikk: <146|274>.  
  Exam Question 154: Why are commodities not interested in each other's use values?   
  [218] Pikk: Procreation   So, am I just a commodity or something that has use value to women? Is sex a mere exchange between five and more senses? Must we all “change hands”? A commodity is always ready to exchange “both soul and body”. For myself, my sexual being does not have a direct use-value without another “commodity”. The only way I can bring value to my sexuality is to bring value to my sexuality is to bring use values to others as a bearer of exchange value and as a means of exchange. In a sense, Marx implies that my sexuality is of no use (or value) to myself until I exchange it (have sex) for the sexuality of someone else's (which have no value to to them until they exchange it with me), what I desire is to be “exchanged”. The act of the exchange puts the two in relation with each other as values. Commodities must be realized as values before they can be realized as use-values. Although I first did not see the sexual undertone to chapter two, professor Ehrbar kindly pointed it out to me. As I was controversial last week, I found this topic somewhat appropriate.   
  Hans: I had not realized how fitting the sexual analogy is.   
 
 
 
  Students enrolled for Econ 5080 in 2009fa are invited to give feedback to the above message
Pseudonym:      UofU ID:  
Text: