Visual Eroticism Is Staring Erotic Capital Down

Late night tea meditations

Over the summer, ‘Visual Eroticism’ has swerved from an artistic discovery to a field study of the economy and marketing of erotics. Now how the fuck did I start thinking critically through erotics as an economy of its own? Ah, I know—the effects of having to make a living off the attractiveness of what my body can do with the collision of involvement in my past, present and future strategic ventures that have bursted into the body of work I’m in now.

It could also be the conversations I’ve had with Brittany and Mariana which resemble the affections and thoughts I have about Krystal. Yeah. That’s absolutely it.

Folks don’t see Krystal Jacksin’s erotic value, because visually and economically her position in the arena is less prioritized, less demanded. What’s Krystal’s position? Dance on all that shit and take up space. While people do value that philosophy and will also prostrate about the psychological benefits of confidence, I often consider why Krystal doesn’t have the type of erotic capital or sexual supply that returns to her in money. Or even substantial demand. Mmmmmmm

Off the top of the dome… I believe folks evaluate Krystal between sexual allure and their own uncertainty of the type of technical prowess that she supplies. Krystal has the direct “take no shit” attitude, a playful “hey boo” personality, a frame of voluptuous curves and the ability to take the attention in a room with just a walk around it—even in midst of others in the room giving their best trick or dance techniques. People either don’t appreciate it all together or like it only enough to invest in it short term

The economy of erotics is built on the social transaction of pleasure that for most is an exchange of achieving and attracting. Let me be fucking clear: there is only a small percentage of people who are universally and naturally attractive by physicality or by charm. Not in that number? Well then, one learns through conditioning, altering and becoming to perform one’s own version(s) of being attractive. This tends to mean that we all have differing and varying amount of erotic capital much like we all have differing and varying amounts of socio-economic status.

In the arena of classes, the reality that the types that do not offer “boom-kat” techniques are less funded or purchased is something that frustrates me. Mainly because that, that my niggas, is a flavor of embodiment, that doesn’t even need the gotdamn label to be called embodiment or sensual. The type of workshopping that Krystal creates is maybe unappealing or intimidating to most of the erotic economy. Maybe it’s because folks’ assholes are so tight as movers to see that playfulness is a skill that is needed for self-acceptance of mistakes. Or folks’ attitudes toward uncertainty are so *insert word* because if it’s not labeled in their identified interest it’s not building that skill? In either direction I’m puzzled and struggle to make words that make sense.

It’s low hanging fruit to point out that part of Krystal’s economic value is impacted by her race, skin-tone, locs, age, mothering, low-key profile that’s uninterested in social media and thick body frame. Those are a given. The more critical reality that I’d like to point out is that I believe her position, while valued, isn’t preferred because of folks crafted personas. Her visual eroticism isn’t the consumer preference based on some of the illogical (but effective) functions of modern branding and identity. And I need folks to sit with their buying decisions and realize that they aren’t as logical as they may believe or even quite aligned with what they truthfully need. Because if they were they’d be taking workshops and classes like P.L.A.Y.

The modern economic reality, when it comes to teaching erotic skills, is that the consumership/buying is motivated by proximity or association or bargain; with values/attitudes/long-term ROI being lost in the sauce of priorities. Adults buy, to learn skills, to achieve higher or change their social status, to have universal sex appeal or from someone that can offer untenable popular culture phenomenons that are instantly gratifying. Rather than, say, a skill that is grounded and requires critique to back up whatever it is that is claimed.

Added: 08.25.24

This isn’t all the “consumers” problem though. It’s the suppliers and the individuals that teach issue too. It’s the thinking that you can take advantage of erotic capital, like one manipulates and hustles a physical product. It’s thinking that you can take marketing/branding strategies from different industries and apply them to the “Erotic industry” without foul. It’s this belief that because we post our bodies “for free” on social media that it’s fair-game to explore mimicry and only coincidentally be inspired. The industry is losing the recipes on even why moodboards exist and are valuable to the creative process; and what being put on game/shadowing the masters of a form really entails.