COMMODITIES AMONG THEMSELVES

Luce Irigaray
Introduction:
Luce Irigaray is a Belgian-born French feminist, philosopher, linguist, psychoanalyst and cultural theorist. Luce Irigaray’s This
Sex Which Is Not One (1977) is a foundational text in feminist philosophy and psychoanalysis. In this work, Irigaray critiques
the dominant theories of sex, gender, and identity as constructed primarily through the lens of male-dominated Western
thought. Her argument centres on the idea that traditional philosophical and psychoanalytic systems have erased or devalued
female sexual and social existence. In addition, the book discusses psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan’s work and the political
economy. Irigaray, in the book, claims that society, as we know it, is based on the exchange of women. Much like commodities
that ensure the smooth economic functioning of society, the consumption, circulation and usage of women’s bodies ensures
social and cultural life. As commodities, women are both utilitarian objects and bearers of value; they possess two forms: a
physical or natural form, and a value form. This concept draws on critical theory, particularly Marxist feminist thought, and
can be understood through the lens of commodity fetishism. It highlights how women have historically been objectified and
commodified within both capitalist societies and patriarchal structures. In other words, Luce Irigaray critiques the capitalist
system for its reductionist tendency to transform all entities, both material and human, into commodities. This thought-
provoking text delves into the foundational structures of patriarchal societies, critically analysing how systems of exchange
prioritize male dominance and marginalize women. It argues that women’s roles within these systems are systematically
commodified, treating them as objects of transaction between men. By exploring the sociocultural and economic dimensions
of this dynamic, the text sheds light on the inherent contradictions that govern gender, sexuality, and power in such societies.
Within this framework, individuals are valued primarily for their economic roles and the exchange value they represent, rather
than for any inherent worth or unique qualities. This process results in the dehumanization of individuals, stripping them of
intrinsic value and subordinating their existence to the logic of profit generation.

1
 Some key points:
Homosexuality: The Hidden Pillar of Patriarchy
The patriarchal structure is often underpinned by an implicit form of symbolic homosexuality among men, where power
dynamics and social hierarchies are primarily structured through male-to-male relationships. Men dominate economic,
political, and social spheres, reinforcing their control and influence while systematically excluding women from these domains.
This dominance is paradoxically intertwined with a hidden form of male-male intimacy that sustains the very structure of
patriarchal society. Masculine homosexuality, though publicly taboo or suppressed, serves as a symbolic mechanism that keeps
these power structures intact. The prohibition of open same-sex relationships among men functions to obscure the foundational
reliance on these bonds, which, in reality, cement the hierarchical roles and reinforce male solidarity. Thus, the prohibition of
visible male homosexuality acts not only as a moral stance but also as a deliberate veil, concealing the essential, often
unspoken, dependency of patriarchal order on such relationships to maintain control and perpetuate gendered power
asymmetries.

• A woman’s value thus is always just out of reach; only to be felt during the operation of the exchange. Of course, the commodity
(the woman) cannot exist in isolation — it exists only in relation to the two men who are involved in the market as active
participants. The exchange of women and commodities is always connected back to men — when a man “buys,” a girl for
instance, the father or the brother is paid and not the mother. Here, wives, daughters and sisters have value only because they
carry the possibility of creating positive relations between men. In other words, the exchange of women between men helps to
maintain what Irigaray calls a “masculine homosexuality,” the actual realisation of which is forbidden. In this context,
heterosexuality becomes a mere alibi shrouding a man’s relations with himself or with other men. This homosexuality enforces
a “sociocultural endogamy,” by virtue of which women are inevitably excluded from the social order.

• The male-dominated systems of exchange within patriarchal societies emphasizes the ways in which social, economic, and
familial relationships are structured to benefit men and reinforce male authority, while subordinating women and reducing
them to objects or commodities. These systems function on various levels, from labour and goods to social relationships, and

2
 serve the overarching goal of maintaining control over power and economic structures through the subjugation and
objectification of women.

• The exchange of women does not take place in terms of value that is intrinsic or immanent to them. Exchange can only take
place when the two women are measured against a yardstick external to both of them. In Irigaray’s own words:
‘It is thus not as “women,” that they are exchanged, but as women to some common feature their current price in gold, or
phalluses — and of which they would represent a plus or minus quantity.’
Commodification of Women in Patriarchy
• In patriarchal systems, women are often reduced to mere commodities, viewed not as autonomous individuals but as tools that
mediate relationships between men. Their identities, desires, and sexuality are constructed in ways that serve male interests,
making them instruments of exchange in a broader system of social and economic transactions. This commodification limits
women to roles defined by male perspectives, where their worth is tied to their ability to fulfil male desires and societal
expectations. Women who deviate from these prescribed roles, particularly those who engage in same-sex relationships or
exhibit non-conforming behaviours, are marginalized and dismissed as imitating or adopting "male" behaviour, which
patriarchal societies deem deviant. In this way, patriarchy denies women the space to exist as independent, self-determined
individuals with their own desires, interests, and the capacity to form relationships free from male influence or expectation.
This structural denial of autonomy underscores how patriarchy enforces gendered limitations, not only by limiting women's
agency but by actively invalidating alternative forms of identity and expression.
Women as Commodities in Male-Dominated Exchanges:
• In patriarchal societies, exchanges—whether of goods, labour, or social relationships—are often centred on male
authority. Women’s roles are typically seen as secondary or supportive to the primary economic and social
functions, which are structured around male-dominated systems of production and exchange. Women are valued
for their utility in maintaining the structure of family, reproduction, and domestic labour, rather than for their
autonomy or independent contributions to society.

3
 • Economic and Reproductive Roles: Women are frequently viewed as bearers of children and caretakers in the
family, roles that, while essential to the continuation of society, are undervalued and relegated to the private sphere.
The unpaid labour of women in the home, such as child-rearing and domestic work, supports the broader economic
system but is not always recognized or compensated. This relegation of women to reproductive and caregiving
roles ensures that they remain largely dependent on male figures—fathers, husbands, or other male authority
figures—who control the economic and social capital of the family.
• Social Utility and Objectification: Women’s value is often understood in terms of their ability to serve male-
dominated social and economic systems. Their bodies are commodified as symbols of sexuality and beauty, often
marketed and consumed within media, advertising, and consumer culture. In this sense, women are objectified:
reduced to their physical attributes, labour, or roles as nurturers. The overarching social structure is thus designed
to limit women's autonomy, keeping them in a subordinate, objectified position in relation to men.

The Gendered Implications of Capitalist Commodification

• Irigaray argues that women are particularly vulnerable to the commodifying tendencies of capitalism, which reduces them to
mere objects within patriarchal economic systems. Just as commodities are bought, sold, and exchanged, women’s bodies and
labour are similarly objectified and exploited in these structures. This commodification is compounded by the systemic
exclusion of women from positions of power within capitalist systems, which deepens their exploitation and makes them more
susceptible to abuse and inequities. Even when women participate in the market economy, they are often undervalued and
underpaid compared to their male counterparts, a reflection of the persistent gendered division of labour. This wage disparity
not only highlights the economic devaluation of women but also underscores how capitalism, in tandem with patriarchy,
perpetuates structural inequalities, ensuring that women remain subordinate both economically and socially. Thus, the
capitalist system reinforces gender hierarchies by treating women as lesser beings whose contributions are systematically
overlooked or undercompensated.

4
Control over Commerce, Relationships, and Power:
• At the core of the patriarchal system is the need to maintain control over commerce, relationships, and power.
This is achieved through the subjugation of women and their reduction to commodities within the system of
exchange. By limiting women’s autonomy, their labour and sexual value become sources of social and economic
power for men.
• Economic Control: The patriarchal structure often confines women to the domestic sphere, where their unpaid
labour sustains the household and indirectly supports the broader capitalist economy. This control over women’s
labour ensures that men retain economic dominance, both in the private and public spheres. Women’s work in the
household, which includes caregiving, child-rearing, and emotional labour, is not typically recognized or
compensated in ways that reflect its value to society.
• Reinforcement of Gender Hierarchy: The objectification of women within patriarchal systems allows for the
reinforcement of gender hierarchies. By framing women as commodities whose value is tied to their utility in
supporting men (through reproduction, emotional labour, or sexual attraction), patriarchal systems ensure that men
remain in positions of power. The subjugation of women is thus a necessary part of maintaining control over
relationships, both in terms of economic transactions and the broader structure of social norms.
• Sexual and Reproductive Control: The commodification of women’s bodies, particularly their reproductive
capacities, is central to the way patriarchy controls power. Women’s sexuality is often treated as something that
can be bought, sold, and exchanged (through marriage, sexual labour, or beauty standards), while their actual
subjectivity and autonomy are marginalized. This control over sexuality and reproduction ensures that men
continue to exercise power over the continuation of their lineages and maintain dominance in family and social
structures.

5
 Patriarchy and the Exchange Process
• Irigaray examines the exchange process within capitalist systems and argues that it is fundamentally embedded in patriarchal
power relations, where gendered hierarchies shape the roles of participants in economic transactions. In this framework, men
predominantly occupy the positions of buyers and sellers, controlling the flow of commodities and setting the terms of
exchange, while women’s labour and bodies are commodified and reduced to objects within this system. Women's roles in the
economy are often confined to performing invisible, undervalued labour—whether in the home or in lower-wage industries—
rendering them as tools for men’s gain. This dynamic not only perpetuates the economic exploitation of women but also
reinforces patriarchal ideologies by reducing women to mere objects of exchange in a system where male dominance is
normalized. Thus, the process of commodity exchange becomes a key mechanism through which patriarchal capitalism
sustains and reproduces gender inequalities, consolidating men’s control over economic resources while limiting women’s
autonomy and participation in shaping the economic landscape.
Endogamous Ties and Patriarchal Norms:
• Patriarchal systems also regulate the formation of relationships and social ties. One significant aspect of this
regulation is the prohibition of incest and the structuring of kinship relationships. In most patriarchal societies,
endogamous (within-group) sexual relationships—particularly incestuous ones—are considered taboo. These
relationships, which could involve direct kinship ties within the same family or tribe, are deemed socially
unacceptable because they undermine the social and familial hierarchy that patriarchy seeks to maintain.
• Control over Family and Reproduction: The regulation of familial and sexual relationships is crucial for
maintaining patriarchal control over inheritance, property, and social status. Incest taboos often serve to ensure
that familial and social alliances are formed in a way that consolidates power and wealth among male figures.
This can be seen in practices like arranged marriages or dowries, which ensure that women remain within male-
controlled structures and do not disrupt the flow of power and resources.

• Preserving Male-Dominated Kinship Structures: The prohibition of incest also reflects a deeper strategy to
preserve the social order by controlling sexual and reproductive roles. By preventing incestuous relationships,
patriarchal systems reinforce the notion that women’s sexual and reproductive labour must be regulated by male
6
 authority figures. The social acceptability of relationships that reinforce male dominance (heteronormative
marriages, for instance) ensures that women’s sexuality is controlled and that women remain subordinated in both
their familial and social roles.

Freud’s Limited Understanding of Female Homosexuality

• Freud’s interpretation of female homosexuality is deeply rooted in patriarchal assumptions, reducing it to what he terms a
“masculinity complex,” which suggests that women’s desire for other women is a form of failed or incomplete heterosexuality.
Freud interprets female homosexual relationships—such as those that might resemble mother-child or husband-wife
dynamics—as arising from an unconscious longing for male authority or phallic power, reflecting his own cultural and
theoretical biases. In this framework, female homosexuality is dismissed as either an anomaly or a biological deviation,
revealing the limitations of Freud’s psychoanalytic theory, which fails to account for the complexity of female desire outside
of a male-centric narrative. This oversight not only undermines the validity of female homosexuality but also reflects broader
societal tendencies to marginalize women’s autonomy and their capacity to form self-determined desires and relationships. By
framing female sexuality within the confines of patriarchal ideology, Freud’s views perpetuate a dominant male-centred
interpretation of human relationships, dismissing the validity of female desires that exist beyond the influence of male
authority.

The Denial of Female Autonomy

• The denial of female autonomy within patriarchal systems underscores the profound limitations placed on women’s ability to
engage in relationships or express desires free from male control or influence. Female homosexuality is only acknowledged
when it aligns with male fantasies or is framed within cultural narratives that reinforce and serve masculine ideals. For example,
relationships between women may be considered acceptable only when they reflect or mirror traditional heterosexual
dynamics, often involving male authority or intervention. In this framework, the idea of women desiring one another and
building relationships independent of male influence is inconceivable, as it threatens the patriarchal order that defines women’s
roles in relation to men. The absence of space for women to exist outside of male authority—whether in sexuality,
7
 relationships, or personal agency—reveals how deeply patriarchy seeks to regulate and control female autonomy. This
systemic denial is a key mechanism by which patriarchy sustains its power, ensuring that women’s desires, identities, and
relationships are always framed within the confines of male-dominated structures.

Impact on Social and Interpersonal Relationships

• Irigaray's critique of capitalism highlights the profound impact it has on social and interpersonal relationships, emphasizing
how the capitalist logic reduces human interactions to transactional exchanges. In her view, capitalism commodifies
relationships by prioritizing economic value over genuine emotional or intellectual connection, which leads to the erosion of
meaningful bonds. This reduction of "otherness" to "sameness" implies that individuals are seen not for their unique qualities,
but as interchangeable commodities, valued primarily for their utility or profitability. As a result, authentic, individualized
connections are undermined, fostering alienation and disconnection within communities. People become more isolated, as
relationships are increasingly shaped by financial incentives rather than mutual understanding or shared humanity. This
dynamic, according to Irigaray, weakens the social fabric, preventing the formation of deep, supportive ties that are necessary
for a cohesive and compassionate society.

Commodification of Women and its Consequences

• The commodification of women, especially through media, advertising, and pornography, reduces them to mere objects of
visual and sexual consumption. According to Irigaray, this reductionist view strips women of their full humanity, as they are
valued solely for their physical appearance and sexual desirability. The constant objectification fosters an internalization
process, where women begin to see themselves through the same lens of commodification, alienating them from their authentic
selves, emotions, and desires. In this way, women become distanced from their true needs and identities, as their worth is tied
to external validation and marketable features. Furthermore, Irigaray critiques the competitive dynamics that patriarchal
capitalism encourages among women, which pits them against each other for limited resources and male attention. This
competition erodes solidarity and collaboration, replacing mutual support with rivalry and reinforcing the patriarchal structures
that continue to commodify women. As a result, not only are women objectified, but they are also encouraged to perpetuate

8
 this system through their own actions, preventing the formation of healthy, collective relationships based on shared
understanding and empowerment.

Violence and Exploitation as Byproducts of Commodification

• The commodification of women, which reduces them to objects of desire and consumption, directly contributes to their
heightened vulnerability to violence and exploitation. When women are depicted as commodities in media, advertising, and
other cultural narratives, they are often perceived as entities to be controlled, owned, and dominated, rather than as autonomous
individuals with rights and agency. This perception fosters cycles of physical, sexual, and psychological abuse, as their value
becomes tied to their subjugation and the power dynamics imposed upon them. The normalization of women's objectification
in the capitalist system perpetuates an environment in which violence is tolerated, or even justified, as a means of asserting
control over them. This not only contributes to widespread abuse but also reinforces societal attitudes that systematically
undermine women's autonomy, treating them as less than fully human. The devaluation of women’s personhood, rooted in
their commodification, leads to the erosion of their dignity and the continued perpetuation of exploitation, making it difficult
for women to claim their rights and challenge oppressive structures.

A Utopian Vision of Equality

• In her critique, Irigaray proposes a radical alternative to the patriarchal system, imagining a world where women, as
"commodities," reject participation in male-dominated exchanges. In this reimagined world, relationships are built on mutual
respect, desire, and autonomy, free from the constraints of economic value, control, and exploitation. These relationships
transcend the commodification of human beings, creating a space for abundance, freedom, and genuine connection. Irigaray’s
vision extends to a utopian reordering of society, where patriarchal norms of exchange and power are dismantled, and
traditional structures of labour, ownership, and accumulation are redefined. In this hypothetical world, interactions are not
driven by competition, profit, or personal gain but are instead grounded in fluid, generous exchanges that prioritize equality,
mutual respect, and the well-being of all individuals. While this vision may seem idealistic, it functions as a powerful critique
of current patriarchal systems, suggesting that alternatives—though perhaps not yet fully realized—may have existed or are
9
 emerging in localized, subtle forms. Irigaray’s utopian model challenges the deeply ingrained hierarchical divisions in society,
proposing that true equality and justice are possible through collaboration, shared resources, and the rejection of exploitation
and control. This vision serves not only as a critique of patriarchy but also as an invitation to imagine how power structures
can be dismantled and replaced with more just and equitable alternatives.

Proposing a Path Toward Justice and Equity

• Luce Irigaray advocates for a fundamental shift in how society perceives and values women, calling for the recognition of
their inherent worth as human beings, independent of economic or aesthetic utility. She argues that women must reclaim their
agency by asserting their individuality, desires, and goals, challenging the reductive standards imposed by patriarchal
capitalism, which commodifies their bodies and identities. This requires rejecting the societal expectation that women’s value
is defined by their ability to serve or please others. Irigaray stresses the importance of solidarity among women as a crucial
strategy to dismantle the competitive and exploitative structures of capitalism and patriarchy. Through mutual support and
collective empowerment, women can challenge the forces that divide and objectify them, fostering healthier relationships and
working together toward justice and equity. This solidarity becomes a transformative force for reshaping societal norms,
enabling women to embrace their full humanity and achieve genuine equality.

The Need for Systemic Transformation

• Luce Irigaray’s critique highlights the urgent need for a systemic transformation that reimagines social and economic
structures, placing human dignity and equity at the centre. She argues that the current systems, which are driven by patriarchal
capitalism, dehumanize individuals by reducing them to commodities, thus perpetuating inequality and alienation. For true
social change to occur, we must reject the commodification of people—particularly women—and redefine the values that
guide our interactions, institutions, and economies. Irigaray’s analysis reveals how the intertwined forces of patriarchy and
capitalism contribute to the marginalization and objectification of women, yet her work also offers a challenge to rethink these
systems and their harmful effects on all individuals. By recognizing and addressing these deep-seated injustices, society can
begin to dismantle the structures of oppression and move toward a world that fosters genuine equity, human connection, and

10
 the recognition of each person’s full humanity. In doing so, we open the door to a more just and inclusive future, where people
are valued not for their economic utility, but for their inherent worth as individuals.

Conclusion
• In conclusion, this analysis underscores the deep entanglements between gender, sexuality, and economic systems within
patriarchal cultures, exposing how these structures are fundamentally interconnected. It challenges readers to envision
alternatives to these systems, where relationships are rooted in mutual respect, freedom, and equality, rather than in dominance
and transactional exchange. By critically examining these patriarchal frameworks, the text calls for a reimagining of the
cultural and social norms that perpetuate inequality and the commodification of individuals. Patriarchy, through its control
over women’s reproductive and sexual capacities, as well as its regulation of familial, social, and economic roles, reduces
women to commodities that serve to maintain the stability of male-dominated systems. This consolidation of male authority
in areas such as labour, reproduction, and social relationships ensures the continued subordination of women and reinforces
an unequal power structure. In this way, patriarchal systems objectify women, restricting their agency and perpetuating the
inequities that define male-dominated societies.

Points To Remember:

• Patriarchy commodifies women and enforces male dominance through systems of exchange that prioritize male relationships
and power.
• Homosexuality is both a foundational element of and a taboo within patriarchal structures, as its acknowledgment threatens to
unravel these systems.
• Female autonomy and homosexuality challenge patriarchal norms but are suppressed, misunderstood, or dismissed as
imitations of male behaviour.
• The text critiques the exploitation inherent in patriarchal systems and imagines a revolutionary alternative where relationships
are free from control, exploitation, and commodification.

11