Originally posted by Joel
View Post
Using that same link:
"The Marxist understanding of commodity is distinct from the meaning of commodity in mainstream business theory. One way to summarize the difference is that commoditization is about proprietary things becoming generic, whereas commodification is about unsalable things becoming salable."
and
"The terms commodification and commoditization are sometimes used synonymously,[7] particularly in the sense of this article, to describe the process of making commodities out of anything that was not used to be available for trade previously; compare anthropology usage.[8][9]
However, other authors distinguish them (as done in this article), with commodification used in social contexts to mean that a non-commercial good has become commercial, typically with connotations of "corrupted by commerce", while commoditization is used in business contexts to mean when the market for an existing product has become a commodity market, where products are interchangeable and there is heavy price competition. In a quip: "Microprocessors are commoditized. Love is commodified."
It's a multi-faceted issue. The ultimate point isn't that hard to understand, in my opinion. We could say that I wish to preserve the sanctity of childbirth if you want something esoteric sounding, but the root effect is the same. You're taking something that is and should be relatively unique and turning it into something that anyone anywhere can have done for whatever reason they choose. Celebrities want kids without sacrificing their bodies, so they have someone else do it for them. People want to wait until their late 30s or early 40s to have kids and still have a way to bypass natural fertility problems. Infertile partnerships (including same-sex relationships) by definition aren't capable of reproduction, but people aren't about to let that stop them. They want it so they will find a way to do it. I don't think that's an ok practice for anything, let alone childbirth.
So yes, it's turning childbirth into a commodity, something that people can have done for any number of reasons with relatively little effort. It's turning a child from an unsalable good to a salable one, and the nature of the exchange is rather irrelevant.
To be honest, I'd like to see you actually defend the concept of surrogacy rather than ask a bunch of "what if" questions in an attempt to prove people aren't really against it. That may not be your intent, but that's how it reads to me.
Comment