Conti, Alie. 2014. - Boston University



Girls as Elite Distinction: Appropriation and Ownership of Bodily CapitalAbstractThe capital concept has proliferated in studies of culture and stratification, usually depicting individual assets as personal advantages within given fields. Because this approach sidesteps issues of ownership, it obscures how unequal value can be generated through the appropriation of someone else’s capital. Based on fieldwork in the VIP party circuit from New York to Cannes, as well as 84 interviews with party organizers and guests, I document the uses of women’s bodily capital by men who appropriate women as a symbolic resource to generate profit, status, and social ties in an exclusive circuit of businessmen. I argue that women are unable to capitalize on their bodily capital as effectively through participation in the VIP scene because symbolic boundaries penalize women for strategic intimacy. By shifting the analysis of capital from individual advantages to systemic extra-individual advantages, this article brings appropriation into the study of culture and class. Further, this article genders the elite by documenting the cultural contradictions of femininity and power in elite men’s social spaces.KeywordsOwnership, Bodily capital, VIP, Girls, ElitesWords: 14,200 (too long!)Dear Reader: Thank you for reading this and I’m sorry it’s so long. I really need help on where I can cut to and where the argument needs support. The paper is R&R’d at Poetics, and I’m happy to share reviewer reports and/or the original paper, just email me. There are a few things I need to do to satisfy the reviewers still but not sure how to go about them: 1) clarify if these are really “elites,” and if so, what type? 2) be consistent about the VIP as a field, or circuit, or a scene; right now I try to do it all. As you read, let me know if you buy my argument that this is an elite world and that it is a field. Introduction Since the expansion of human capital to account for the cultural foundations of class inequality (Bourdieu 1986), new concepts of cultural capital have proliferated. Some are in response to changes in the world, like changing class structure and hence, emergent cultural capitals (Prieur and Savage 2013), while others are efforts to understand specific fields, like sexual capital (Martin and George 2006), and the role of the body in carrying capitals, from aesthetic (Anderson et al. 2010), bodily (Wacquant 1995), and physical capital (Shilling 1993). Marx’s old concern with capital accumulation centered on owners and the unequal extraction of value, yet in sociology’s “accumulation of capitals,” there is a relative absence of attention to appropriation and ownership (Neveu 2013). To whom does the value of all of these capitals go? This article revisits the problem of ownership in the case of women’s “embodied cultural capital” (Bourdieu 1984). Building on feminist revisions of capital and its conversions (McCall 1992; Skeggs 2004), I examine the uses of women’s bodily capital and the differential value it generates for men and for women. If, as Randall Collins has posited (1992), women are to status as men are to class, what are the signifiers and types of value that women afford, and why does their value accrue disproportionately to men? I present ethnographic data on the circulation of women with highly valued bodily capital, called “girls,” in the global circuit of VIP parties catering to the new global elite. A modern social and representational category, “the girl” signifies the contested status of young women who lie outside childhood and outside social codes and conventions of adulthood relating to gender, marriage, sexuality, and motherhood (Weinbaum et al. 2008). I show how men and women unequally profit from women’s embodied symbolic value, or girl capital for short, which men use to generate status and social connections in an exclusive circuit of businessmen. I document this process by following women throughout the VIP party circuit and its organizers, called party promoters, a class of largely male brokers hired to bring women to VIP destinations. I observe women at parties in New York, the Hamptons, Miami, and the French Riviera over 18 months. Additionally, this article draws from interviews with 20 girls, 44 promoters, and 20 clients (men who spend money in VIP parties). Drawing from men’s interviews, I map the moral distinctions—especially sexual morality (Parrenas 2011)—that men use to evaluate girls and approach interactions with them in the VIP club. I argue that women are unable to capitalize on their bodily capital through participation in the VIP scene precisely because their use of bodily capital aligns them with devalued social identities. By shifting the analysis from capital as an individual resource to the cultural meanings that make capital unequally convertible, this article brings systems of ownership and appropriation into the study of culture and class. In addition, this paper “genders” the elite and documents the cultural contradictions of femininity and power in elite men’s social spaces. THE CAPITAL CONCEPTEmbodied Capital as Personal Advantage Since Bourdieu analyzed cultural dispositions as convertible resources, types of cultural capitals have multiplied to show how people navigate through various fields, from the neoliberal city (Centner 2008 on spatial capital) to underground parties (Thornton 1995 on subcultural capital).1 By establishing the conversion value and outcomes of people’s various capitals, sociologists have explicated the cultural mechanisms of class reproduction (e.g. DiMaggio 1982; Rivera 2012). However, these refinements tend to understand the value of cultural capital as a personal resource, because such analyses are concerned with how people or groups of people advance through fields to acquire, for example, neighborhood access (Centner 2008) or social esteem (Thornton 1995). This tendency to focus on individual-level rewards characterizes the conceptual offspring of Bourdieu’s “embodied cultural capital,” those corporeal cues of class written onto the body (Bourdieu 1984, p. 91). Bourdieu noted that looks are not entirely dependent on class trajectories, and to account for the resource of physical appearance, sociologists have developed an array of concepts: bodily capital (Wacquant 1995), physical capital (Shilling 1993), and aesthetic capital (Anderson et al. 2010).Together, these works show how embodied capitals are convertible for individual rewards, like earnings, status, and romantic outcomes (for a review see Hammermesh 2011). For example, Green shows how “sexual capital,” the recognition of being desirable in a given field, orders status in nightlife (2011; see also Hamilton 2007). The conversion rates of bodily capital are gendered, and a school of British feminist scholars argues that femininity itself is a form of cultural capital with wide currency not accessible to men, for instance, in some segments of the labor market like care work (Huppatz 2009; Lovell 2000; Skeggs 1997). These analyses implicitly frame the primary value of someone’s embodied capital residing with the capital holder herself. An extreme version of this argument is Hakim concept of “erotic capital,” which she argues is women’s collective asset because a biological mandate makes women’s sex appeal more valuable than men’s (2010; for a critique see Green 2013). By keeping the focus on capital as a personal asset with individual consequences, sociologists implicitly shares with neoclassical economists an assumption that self-investment leads to better market outcomes, paradigmatic of human capital theory (Becker 1994). This is explicit in Hakim’s framing of erotic capital, which posits beauty as a currency; she who possesses it gets to “spend” it. Such an approach exemplifies a neoliberal philosophy of the personal imperative for self-investment and a disregard to systemic power relations that unequally distribute erotic capital across populations. Moving beyond the personal advantage perspective, we might ask: who, beyond any particular individual, benefits from the value of people’s embodied capital, and why? Gender and the Unequal Value of Embodied CapitalScholars working at the intersection of gender and Bourdieusian theory have begun to chart how gender structures the field of power such that women and men have differential capacities to profit from the value of their own capital (McCall 1992; Skeggs; Lovell 2000; McNay 2000). As “sign-bearing capital,” Skeggs argues, women are a gender and class resource that men appropriate (2004 p. 22), a kind of “repository” of capital (McNay 2000, p. 142) that can generate social capital and status for men (Chancer 1998; Lovell 2000). Much literature shows how women’s bodies signify men’s class distinction, as Sombart noted among the capitalist classes of the 18th century (1967 [1922]) see also Veblen 2009 [1899]). Contemporary ethnographies document such processes of distinction in interactional service settings like retail, where workers, particularly women, do “recognition work” to construct high status (Hanser 2008, p. 106; Sherman 2007). Women’s bodies add value to organizations, such that employers seek out particular types of women’s bodies because they signify distinction, for instance tall and svelte women are valuable “feminine capital” in luxury services (Otis 2011). Analyses of sex work likewise document the crucial role of female sexual capital in forging men’s business networks through leisure activities (Hoang forthcoming; Osburg 2013). For example, Allison’s ethnography of Japanese hostess clubs shows how women’s sexual capital is exchanged among men to uphold a system of male-controlled capitalism in Japan (1994). The appropriation of someone else’s embodied capital need not happen via wages. In Greek college life, fraternities gain status from women’s bodily capital, typified by “the blonde” who circulates without pay through frat parties (Hamilton 2007). Similarly, nightclubs amass women’s bodily capital to attract men with money (Grazian 2008; Rivera 2010). Beyond its personal advantages, bodily capital holds value for people and organizations able to harness it, whether by wages or other means.While these literatures richly document the individual and organizational uses of women’s bodies, they rarely explain the unequal extraction of value from embodied cultural capital. Some feminist scholars have suggested that bodily capital is less valuable to women than women’s bodily is to men for structural and cultural reasons. Gayle Rubin’s “political economy of sex” traced the traffic in women as a system of relations in which women are circulated and exchanged among men, who are the main beneficiaries of women as social commerce (1975, p. 174). Women enable social organization through their exchange in kinships, but men control and benefit from the system (Levi-Strauss 1969). Structurally, women hold fewer positions of power and weaker control of economic capital than men. Culturally, feminine beauty and sex appeal are considered incompatible with professional competence and authority (McCall 1992). Women who succeed in cultivating beauty are cultural aligned with a devalued feminine realm. Additionally, women with high stores of valued bodily capital are subject to greater distrust for strategically using their looks to gain what is seen as unfair and unearned advantage (Haltunen 1982).Yet polemical feminist claims that women are “valued possessions in themselves, a source of asserting power between men” (Chancer 1998, p. 261), lack explanation, taking men’s uses of women’s bodies as evidence of ownership, such that female bodies are always already a property of men in a sexist society. The question of process remains: How is capital transformed from a personal asset to one controlled by someone else?Taking the global elite party scene as a case to examine the gendered convertibility and value of bodily capital, I consider the role of women in the VIP and outline the symbolic meanings of women’s bodily capital below. In the VIP, capital transforms from women’s personal asset to one of greater value for men, i.e., from a property of women to women as property.THE CASE: THE VIP CIRCUITTo examine processes of ownership around a form of embodied cultural capital, this article uses the case of women in VIP leisure events for the jet-set elite. The term “jet-set” has origins in the 1950s in reference to global flyers, an era in which commercial flights were prohibitively expensive for most people except the most privileged professionals and tourists. Jet-set is colloquially used to reference highly-mobile persons with class resources; VIP, or “very important people,” is a purchasable status that denotes valued consumers. Sociologists define elites as those with vast class and cultural resources (Khan 2012). Elites belong to the jet-set and the VIP, but not all elites participate in this scene, and many of those who participate are economically insecure. As such, this paper uses the term elite to refer to big spending patrons of clubs—people who have demonstrable economic resources—while the scene is best described as composed of jet-setters and VIPs. Both VIP parties and elites are global, since the world’s wealthiest stratum is today characterized as more international, more mobile and more geographically diverse than its predecessors (Atkinson and Piketty 2007; Khan 2012). These parties appear in nodes in the global circulation of the business class, which follows a transatlantic calendar of VIP events and parties from St. Barts in January, Miami in March to St. Tropez in July, and parallel to the Fashion Week calendars each September and February (FT 2012). In such nodes, VIPs frequent exclusive nightclubs, which offer “bottle service.” Rather than order drinks at the bar, VIP patrons rent tables and purchase whole bottles of alcohol, which come with ice and mixers, at prices ranging from $250 per bottle of Absolut vodka (750 ml which retails for $25) to $5,000 for a magnum-size (1.5 liters) bottle of Cristal champagne (which retails for $750). The average price is $1500 per table on a Saturday night at one exclusive nightclub (Elberse, Barlow and Wong 2009). Big spending clients are called “whales” as in finance and gambling lingo, and clubs showcase their expensive purchases by lighting firework sparklers affixed to the bottles and carried by “bottle girls,” attractive women in revealing clothing, to clients’ tables. Entry to these clubs requires the purchase of bottle service, or is free (“comped”), depending on status determinations made by personnel at the door, which are gendered and class-coded (May and Chaplin 2008; Rivera 2010). The door screening ensures that the bottle service club is an exclusively VIP space.METHODS Ethnography is the best method to observe the interactional processes of capital conversions, and interviews are ideal for capturing the differential field of meanings around these capital conversions. I gained access to VIP clubs from previous fieldwork in the fashion modeling industry, which has substantial ties to nightclubs and specifically, to party promoters. In my earlier fieldwork, promoters invited me to their parties free of charge with dinner included; to begin this project, I accepted their invitations and began going out with them. Over the course of 18 months in New York, I attended 17 clubs and went out with promoters on over 100 nights, in addition to taking four trips to VIP destinations. I interviewed a total of 44 promoters (all of them working in New York); of those, seven are transitioning or have already become owners or managers of clubs or restaurants. Interviews were recorded and sometimes lasted over the course of several days as extended conversations. Of the 44 promoters interviewed, I accompanied all but eight of them to their parties at least once and as much as 10 times, and sometimes I visited three or four clubs over the course of one night, which generally began with dinner at 10 p.m. and ended between 3 – 4 a.m., with occasional after-parties stretching beyond 8 a.m. the next day. Methodologically I followed Kusenbach’s go-along ethnographic method, a hybrid of interviewing and participant observation by following promoters on their daily and nightly rounds to trace the social architecture of elite nightlife (2003). Daytime observations proved as important as nighttime encounters, as one promoter told me: “There can be no night without the day,” albeit the promoter’s day rarely begins before 11 a.m. and often as late as 2 p.m. when he wakes up. Promoters generally welcomed my presence, since their job is chiefly in getting women to hang out. In exchange for promoters’ participation, I dressed the part and went out with them at night; thus through my own bodily capital I was able to maneuver the problem of ethnographic access in studying up (Gusterson 1997). Reflecting the demographics of promoters, my sample is majority men and includes five women. Half of the 44 promoters interviewed are immigrants (n=22). Most of them speak multiple languages and can converse with international clients and models. Out of the 44 promoters interviewed in New York, just eight of them are white Americans. I also accepted invitations to VIP destinations on four occasions: five nights in Miami (March), two separate weekends in the Hamptons (June), and one week in Cannes (July), with most expenses paid by promoters, clubs, and VIP clients. Two trips, to Miami and Cannes, were with a promoter named Santos, who I met at a club in New York. After explaining my research, interviewing him, going out with him, and several text conversations later, Santos invited me to attend his parties in Miami over the month of March, during the Electronic Music Festival which draws music industry personnel, and as I discovered, also clients, promoters, and models from around the world. I paid for my own flight to Miami and stayed for free with four young women in the accommodations Santos arranged for all of us together, in the guesthouse of a villa on Star Island, rented by a group of Californian mortgage bankers (who paid $50,000 for the weekend rental). A year later, I met up with Santos in Europe, first in Milan for a night out at a nightclub where he promotes, and next I followed him to Cannes for a week, staying in his rental villa with eight other women. Finally, I visited the Hamptons on two weekend trips during the summer season. The first time was with a promoter named Sampson who I met on the street in Soho with one of Santos’ associates. The following summer I took at second trip without promoters, when a client invited me to his shared 9-bedroom mansion for a weekend to join a ten other women guests. Copious amounts of alcohol and sometimes drugs are supplied to women free of charge; I generally held a glass of champagne during the parties but refrained from drinking more than occasional sips, enough to fit in. Taking notes proved easy, as everyone is constantly tapping on their phones, especially promoters, even as they dance inside clubs.I interviewed a sample of 20 women and 20 clients in New York. As it was impossible to secure lists of clients or women from either the nightclubs or the promoters, I built non-probabilistic samples composed of participants I recruited in three different ways: through face-to-face meetings at dinners and parties; through promoters; and through snowball sampling. I recruited women primarily from the tables. Each night out I habitually introduced myself to each woman at the table to find out how she met the promoter we accompanied. At this point in our conversation, I typically would explain my role as a writer working on a project about nightlife. Interviews with women focused on their relationships with promoters and clients and their careers in the scene. Among the 20 women interviewed, their median age is 23. At 31-32, I was regularly the oldest woman at promoters’ tables but still welcome because I look younger.Clients were the most difficult to approach for interviews. I might be one of two-dozen women in the presence of clients at parties, and few opportunities arose inside clubs in which I might speak with them about my research, given the loud music. If clients attended pre-party dinners, I was able to explain my research, and on quieter nights in clubs I could seize on moments to explain my work and request interviews. Therefore I primarily relied on snowball sampling and recommendations through promoters to interview clients, focusing the interview on their party careers and motivations, and their relationships forged in nightclubs.I coded interview transcripts and field notes using the software Nvivo with a coding scheme that emerged inductively in accordance with the analytical strategy of grounded theory (Charmaz 2001). I have replaced all names with pseudonyms and removed potentially identifying information.FINDINGSGIRLS AS ELITE DISTINCTION A party becomes VIP if it is relatively more exclusive and harder to access, as scarcity lends higher status (Bourdieu 1986). All respondents identified between 10 – 12 nightclubs in NYC as places for socializing with the global VIP. Respondents were immediately able to say which among these were the “hottest” clubs at the moment, so-called “A-List” clubs as opposed to “B- and C-List,” citing the quality of a club’s crowd. A quality crowd with more “very important people” than others will exhibit visible cues of wealth and status: bottles with sparklers and beautiful women. Bottles are purchased by clients, almost always men, the most prized being “whales.” In my own research, whales have paid $200,000 for parades of hundreds of sparkler-lit bottles of champagne brought to their table (known as a “bottle train”). Also highly prized are celebrities, who may or may not pay for their drinks but are valuable for their symbolic capital. Clubs also value affluent businessmen like Wall Street workers and affluent tourists, who spend in regular and smaller amounts of $1,000 – 2,000 a night. At the bottom of male patrons are “fillers,” men who buy drinks at the bar but have some cultural capital, which keeps the club from looking empty. One estimate suggests as much as 80% of the club’s profits come from bottle service customers, though they account for only 40% of the club’s customers (Elberse, Barlow and Wong 2009). Below fillers, male patrons with low cultural capital are described as “bridge and tunnel,” so-called because they are not recognized as Manhattan dwellers, and may be barred entry even if they offer to buy bottle service. To attract whales, clubs use women as bait. Consistent with past research on nightlife, promoters explained that clubs like to have more women than men (Rivera 2010). By my count clubs averaged about 3:2 women to men and sometimes as high as 3:1. Women are consider to be both safer, with lower likelihoods of fights, and more appealing to be around since they constitute what Goffman termed “chance,” a driver of social interaction in entertainment venues that makes the space more exciting for male patrons (1967). However, the quantity of women does not alone suffice to distinguish the VIP space. A club needs a high quantity of so-called “quality” women, measured along a clear hierarchy defined exclusively by her beauty. Exploiting the correlation between attractiveness and status (Webster and Driskell 1983), clubs and their promoters target women whose bodies correspond to those valued in the high-fashion arena as models. Such women are ubiquitously called “girls,” a term which signifies a distinct social category (Weinbaum et al. 2008). In the VIP scene, girls are young (roughly 16 – 25), thin (size 0 – 4), tall (at least 5’9” without heels), and typically though not exclusively white. All promoters described models as inherently valuable for their looks alone, as New York promoter Sampson explained: “When I walk into the club with ten models, it catches your eye.” Super models are at the very top of valuable girls, working or “signed” models with well-known agencies come next, as these girls are understood to be the most physically attractive (i.e., “hot”) as well as “cool,” meaning high in cultural esteem. In this field, the model is embodied symbolic capital; she carries the current status of high fashion to denote a space as elite. The VIP nightlife formula is sometimes called “models and bottles:” Models and bottles everywhere! The crowd is amazing and the space is designed so that I can relax, I can have a conversation with important people or I can go crazy in the club. The door is screened to let in only the best crowd. I won’t go someplace where door isn’t screened and crowd isn’t beautiful. - Dre, 40, Black male from France, promoter for 22 yearsBecause such girls are thought to attract clients, clubs go through elaborate endeavors to ensure they have a high quantity of quality girls. To these ends, clubs hire promoters on a contractual basis to recruit a quality crowd, paying them between $200 and $1,000 per night, depending on the perceived worth of their crowd. In addition, promoters receive between 10 – 20% commission from bottle sales when they arrange tables for clients. Girls are typically not paid, but instead offered free dinners in expensive restaurants, free drinks and occasionally also free trips to luxury destinations for parties, all paid for by clubs or promoters. Promoters usually focus their efforts on finding models, recruiting them from Facebook, on the street, at model castings, and through friend networks. Promoters believe models make good guests in nightclubs because of their young ages, flexible schedules and infrequent jobs (especially for newcomers), which allows them to stay out late and often. Models are also globally mobile workers who move about major cities where financial elites also congregate. This creates a homogenized model look throughout the VIP leisure circuit. During fieldwork in the Hamptons, Miami, and Cannes, I saw familiar faces of girls, as well as clients and promoters I knew from New York.Unlike the modeling market, where a woman’s value emerges from her singularity (Mears 2011), in nightlife, girls are valued for their generic equivalencies to exacting physical standards: tall, thin, and young. Many high-fashion models are not conventionally attractive according to dominant tastes, or promoters’ own tastes, Dre explained while we sat at a trendy sidewalk cafe in Soho. I watched Dre eyeing a very thin young woman at a nearby table. She looked like a model. “That’s the kind of girl we are after,” he tells me. “That’s the kind of girl we want with us.” “Why?,” I asked. “Some men might not think that’s attractive.”“It’s true, she’s too skinny,” says Dre. “I like a woman with more curves on her. But to most people, models represent the dream. They represent the elite trendy world, the high-end world of fashion and beauty. They are the dream. I am not attracted to her, but she is my target, if I see her on the street I’ll stop her and talk to her. We need those girls.” As the ubiquitous use of the term “girl” suggests, women’s inclusion in the VIP party is closely tied to youth. The close coupling of youth and women’s value has long been critiqued as an unshakable patriarchal feature of social life from tribal to advanced capitalist societies. The VIP is no exception, but the scene is exceptional in its explicit denigration of older women. For instance, at one dinner party, Dante, a client and regular attendee of jet-set parties summarized: “18-28 is the time for girls. After 28, nobody looks at you.” Another night, at a club in NYC, I spoke with a celebrated musician, himself 40 years old, who sat at a promoter’s table with his 20 year-old blonde girlfriend. Surprised to learn my own age of 32, he offered: It’s because you are brunette. Blondes, they break quite soon. Like Eastern European girls, they are very beautiful but it fades fast.Women in temporary possession of this bodily capital, or “girls,” are treated to free nights out in expensive restaurants and clubs around the world, regardless of their financial means or personal qualities. Physical looks take primacy over girls’ affect or other embodied cues of class such as accent or comportment; given clubs’ low lighting and loud music, personality counts less than immediate bodily cues. Eleanor, who is not a model but approximates the look, explained:It’s all about how you look, how thin you are, how tall you are. It’s all that matters. You could have a horrible personality, and you’ll get into the club if you’re 5’9”. But basically, the promoters will come and find attractive girls, and tell you to bring friends that are attractive, skinny, tall, you know. And they’ll bring you out, and you don’t have to pay for anything.- Eleanor, 22, White American fashion student, from NJOf course, promoters prefer to host girls who are “fun” and have high energy, but this is hardly a requirement at their tables. Frequently I sat at tables with girls looking bored, tired, or absorbed in their phones, and even on a few occasions falling asleep. Because the field values above all the fashion model, promoters generally treat these girls with great care and attention. When a model named Tasha lost her coat, the promoter Dre spent an hour at the end of the night searching for it, scolding his fellow promoters to be more careful with girls’ belongings. “What’s wrong with [that promoter]? She is a model! She’s an asset to our business. Why would you treat her like that?”After working models, clubs’ next prefer girls who look like they could be models. These are called “good civilians,” as in military terminology designating people who do not belong to the field. Good civilians have the height and slenderness to denote high status, but club workers can spot their slightly inferior bodily capital. A promoter named Jay (29 years-old, African American and a promoter for eight years), explained as we walked down New York’s Spring Street, after his head turned with the passing of a young woman:“She’s hot,” he said casually as we kept walking. “She’s not a model but she’s hot, I’d definitely get with her. That’s what we call a good civilian…. There’s models and there’s good civilians. A good civilian is a girl who fits the description of model but is not really a model. Like she’s not as slim or, you know what I mean, she’s not 5’11,” but she might be 5’8.” She’s just a pretty hot girl, something that the clubs will see and say ‘Ok, she’s pretty hot.’” Near the bottom ranks of acceptably good civilians, girls’ bodies are more likely to be curvaceous with mainstream sex appeal, ethnically non-white, and visibly older than their late-20s. The least valuable are short and overweight women, who are discussed with vitriol as liabilities for the reputations of both clubs and promoters. Explained Mike, a 23-year old white American and promoter for two years: “I will use the term muppets or hobbits to describe the, like, less-than fortunate-looking girls.” Other terms used to describe women who do not conform to fashion standards, and are therefore of low value in the VIP space, are “pedestrian,” “civilian,” and, more derisively, “midget.” Such women are regularly denied entry and screened out by the door personnel, who are under strict instructions to grant entrance only to those female bodies who fit the club’s image of “cool.” One policy at an NYC club prohibits entry of any woman shorter than the 5’7” woman who screens the door.Thus, the “quality” of a club’s crowd comes down to two factors: the wealth of men and the perceived beauty of female guests. The VIP is a space restricted to people with recognizable stores of cultural, social, symbolic, economic capital, and in the case of women, bodily capital. = Insert Table: Hierarchies of Participants =Girls therefore act as a means of distinction. As Godart and Mears found that models can lend status to the fashion houses that employ them (2009), similarly, in the VIP club industry, nightclub organizations can boost their status with the presence of girls who look like models. The value of such women resides both in women’s bodies and in the class distinction such bodies project, even if they don't necessarily come from upper-class backgrounds.Analyzed in Bourdieusian terms, the VIP is field-like in that it is a structure of relations between positions endowed with different volumes and compositions of capital. A recognizably stable set of participants play in a social contest over status, in this case, over who counts as “very important,” akin to the sexual field more generally where participants struggle for desirability (Green 2008). In this field, women’s main resource is bodily capital, defined as the field-specific look of fashion models, an exaggeration of traditional standards of youth and beauty for women in the sexual field more generally (Green 2008). This bodily capital is convertible for resources like access to fun parties, trips, drinks, and the chance to meet wealthy men. Sociologists have made this kind of analysis, approaching nightlife as a field where people wield “nocturnal capital” (Grazian 2007) to “cash in” on the prize of entry to nightclubs (Rivera 2010, p. 250). This approach illuminates how embodied capitals yield individual, personal advantages. Yet by focusing on personal capitalization strategies, this approach sidesteps how fields are embedded in power inequities that allow some actors the opportunity to extract more value from capital than the bodies in which it is endowed. Following feminist analyses on the unequal access to the value of bodily capital (e.g., Skeggs 2004), below I show how men are able to extract more value from women’s bodily capital than are women themselves. THE WORTH OF GIRL CAPITALIt’s 2 a.m. when I exit an exclusive New York City nightclub with ten girls in heels, tight dresses and skinny jeans. We have been dancing and drinking champagne, free of charge, after a sushi dinner, also free. As we leave the dark club and its strobe-lit splashes of color and pile into a white florescent elevator, Beyoncé’s hit dance single, “Run the World (Girls),” booms loudly. The music shakes the walls, and the girls continue to bounce and dance out the doors to the song’s well-known chorus, “Who run the world? Girls, Girls!” Philippe joins in the chorus, adding a line at the end, “Who run the girls? Boys, Boys!” Philippe high-fives his fellow promoter, who laughs, as do the women, who continue dancing out into the street.-- Field notes, 2 a.m. Downtown nightclub, April The comped evening was arranged for us by a club promoter named Philippe, a 45-year old black man from Ghana, looking far more casual but no less cool in baggy jeans, bright sneakers, t-shirt, and backwards baseball cap. Philippe works in team composed of four men: himself, age 44, his 45-year old cousin Thibault, their associate, a 56 year old light skinned Jamaican immigrant named Nicolas, and their “sub,” or assistant, a racially mixed 21-year old Brazilian named Jack. They come out four nights a week with at least 12 women, sometimes up to 25, and they visit between two or three VIP clubs often owned by the same corporate group. Philippe reports the crew makes $3,000 per night, plus an additional 20% of what their clients spend on bottle service. Three of the four promoters drive big escalade SUVs, spacious enough to fit several women in the backseat. Into one of these SUVs I will now squeeze with six other women, heading to the next club, and eventually, home at around 3:30 a.m.In the VIP arena, men use “girls” as a kind of capital, or “girl capital,” for shorthand. As a symbolic resource, men use girls to generate profit, status, and social connections in the exclusive global leisure circuit. The convertibility of girl capital does not work equally for women.Girls as Symbolic and Economic CapitalGirl capital generates profits for clubs and promoters. The revenues of one successful nightclub surpass $6 million a year, and the firm that owns it had sales over $20 million in 2007 (Elberse, Barlow and Wong 2009). These profits are largely concentrated in men’s hands. Of the 17 VIP nightclubs I attended in New York, just one is owned by a woman. The male-dominated club industry hinges on this conversion of girl capital into economic capital:If I’m working at club A and club B, and club A, I bring all the models and the super attractive people, and just lots of other people like a mix to club B. Now, when a client goes to A, he sees our crowd, and tells all his friends, “I was at this party with all these models.” And he wants to go back and he’ll pay a lot to be there, but to club B, maybe he won’t. That’s the difference. It’s good to be beautiful. It’s valuable to me and to the client and the clubs. Beauty sells. - Trevor, 21, Black promoter for 9 months, from MiamiClients confirmed that a high volume of girls is an important draw for them to spend money, for example: To me, it matters that she’s good-looking, not necessarily a model but good looking. You won’t see a promoter getting a black 200-pound girl to the table. For people I meet when I’m out, I don’t wanna see 200 guys. I prefer to see girls. It makes the club look better if you put 50 hot girls in the club, you think, “This is worth the check.”- Ricardo, 23, White, Finance associate from ColumbiaPromoters, recall, are paid between 10 – 20% commission on bottle sales in addition to their salaries; girls do not typically receive payment. The presence of girls for Philippe and his crew did more than make them money; girls lend them symbolic status. They are widely discussed on blogs and nightlife press reports, and recognized around the world. They openly discussed the ways in which girls made them personally more appealing, especially to women. Jack was dating a top Brazillian model at the time I met him, something Phillippe described as only possible since joining the promoter crew:You see Jack? He’s the guy we used to always see outside?the club, like trying to get us to get him in, ‘cause he didn't have swag, didn't have social skills. Since getting with us, like, I joke his pussymeter went way up. Like this girl [indicates Jack’s model girlfriend], you see? … Now he’s hanging with us, he’s getting girls.Men are more likely to be promoters as well. In New York, after some effort, I tracked down eight women promoters (interviewing five of them); I met male promoters nightly. Girl capital is therefore useful for male promoters and club owners to elevate a club into a high-status space, from which individual and organizational profits can be made. Girls as Mobility ProjectsMen also use girl capital to strategically meet and network with other men in important social and business circles. Most clients and promoters simply believe that a room full of men is less comfortable than a room with girls, explained Artem, a Russian male model promoting in Hong Kong and NYC:Sometimes management calls me or big guys calling like, “Hey I have clients in town…” Because it’s five guys, with a magnum of champagne, and they look like fucking faggots. “So please,” they say, “get us the girls.” So it’s not like prostitution and shit like that. They don’t even talk to the girls… They just look nice, and it breaks the ice, to get comfortable. - Artem, 28, White promoter for three years, from Russia Without the presence of girls, men risk losing face in heteronormative business settings, where most owners and mangers are male. Girls are key to helping men form and maintain social ties that will be valuable to expand their business opportunities. In interviews, promoters and clients widely evoked the value of girls and their importance for the men’s mobility projects. The client Dante, in explaining his climb from event planner to real estate broker among the jet-set, explained the importance of girls for his own professional success: “Everyone needs some decoration. Especially in the beginning.” As an unknown face in the VIP, Dante used girls as décor in two senses of the word, as embellishments intended to make plain things look better, and in the sense of a mark of honor. Another client, Luc, described how girls capture his attention, through which he recognizes power in other men: When these guys go out, they bring like 15 girls. It’s just decoration to show off. Even if they don’t sleep with them they have them to show off: “Oh, who is this guy? Look at all those girls, wow! He must be rich; he must be famous.” It’s just superficial.- Luc, 48, Food and beverage entrepreneur, Inherited wealthGirls indirectly perform “recognition work,” which Sherman (2007) identifies in the luxury service economy as the labor of bestowing class entitlement upon high-end consumers (also Hanser 2008, p. 106). VIP girls allow men to recognize power in each other to facilitate a man-to-man exchange of money and information. Of key difference, girls are not paid for this service. Observations with clients in the Hamptons provide an illustrative example. I first heard of the nine-bedroom mansion in the Hamptons upon meeting Grant, a tech entrepreneur of about 40, whom I met at a group dinner in NYC’s Meatpacking District. Grant described the mansion, which he shares with three other businessmen from the city, as having an “exclusive guest list.” They aim to host at least 20 models each weekend during the summer season. With 18 beds, including bunk beds, he referred to it as “model camp.” Later when I interviewed one of the mansion’s co-owners, Donald, I was invited to visit their home for the weekend. With Donald, a 60-year old associate at a Wall Street investment fund, I attended one nightclub, one daytime pool party, and one luxurious house party hosted by the CEO of a private equity firm. By the end of the weekend, Donald explained frankly that, “Girls are currency,” by which he means that with lots of girls, he is assured a steady stream of invitations to the most exclusive parties and dinners in the Hamptons VIP scene. He also means that important people are more likely to take up invitations to pay social visits to his mansion. (I observed Donald invite a real estate tycoon and former model agency owner to his house: “You should come to our house one of these days… It’s quite the menagerie, if you want to relive the old days.”)I did not observe Donald talking about concrete business or investment deals at these parties, but when asked, he confirmed the importance of the Hamptons scene for his finance career: “It’s always good to get invited to these things.” The girls also offer romantic chance: Donald, for example, met his previous girlfriend, a 19-year-old model, when she came through his house one weekend. Sexual chance with girls, while clearly important, frequently took a backseat to the business opportunities men seek with each other. This was the case at a dinner party at an upscale restaurant in Miami, where Santos brought me along with three models to dine with his “best friend,” an NYC commercial real estate developer and big spender named Sergie, relayed here in field notes:Sergie sits in the middle of a long table, surrounded by older men, his business associates. He is engaged in intense and quiet conversation all night with them, and he rarely speaks to the girls or to Santos; we are seated on the opposite side of the table. The girls barely speak to each other or to the men, except when we are occasionally talked to with flirtatious banter. One man asks Jenny, sitting next to me, what the plan is for tonight’s nightclubbing, and when Jenny doesn’t know he says, “You girls just have to show up and smile, don’t you?”Aside from these light remarks, men dominate the conversation with talk of marketing, politics, mutual friends in Gulf States, and real estate. Two of the men exchange phone numbers, one man offers another to take him for a tour of a Miami neighborhood primed for redevelopment. After two hours, all of the girls are silent and looking bored on our phones. So is Santos, the promoter. Jenny whispers to me that she wants to leave. “I hate when they just talk about money and extend these dinners, blah blah blah.” - Field notes, March 25, MiamiAt this VIP dinner, the men showed little interest in talking with us, but rather, to each other about their world of business. By drawing on the labors of women to establish relationships with each other, clients are able to form and maintain business ties in these leisure settings.Likewise, through girls, promoters build ties to clients, who are useful for their future goals of opening their own businesses. Thirty of the 39 male promoters interviewed began the job by virtue of accompanying beautiful girls to nightclubs. Once in the job, they use girls as a key means of attracting attention from club owners and clients, and to climb hierarchies among the elite. Sampson is a good case of the uses of women in promoters’ upward mobility. His entry into nightlife began when a promoter noticed him out with a beautiful woman, who invited Sampson to join his team. To climb upward to work at the most exclusive clubs, Sampson surrounded himself with more beautiful women, and he subsequently utilized girl capital to build economic relationships with clients. At a pool party on the roof of a Manhattan hotel, I observed Sampson share drinks with George, the owner of a software company from California, whom Sampson described to me as “one of the biggest ballers in L.A.” and a prospective client. Talks were underway for Sampson to begin organizing George’s parties in L.A. and in St. Barth, a conversation which orbited around Sampson’s claims to girls: Standing poolside, we clink glasses of rose wine and Sampson begins to show Instagram photos of a girl, Krissy, to the client, who nods and notes that she is “hot.” “See, I said George will love her. She’s the hottest girl I know right now.”“She’s definitely my type,” says George. “Bring out some girls like that to L.A.”Sampson says, “Yeah, she’s one of mine. Look at this--“ and he shows more pictures. “The girl is crazy though, she can drink so much.”“Bring her out to L.A., that’s the kind of girl we need to have out to party.” They discuss the details of George’s upcoming month-long parties planned for August in L.A. and next January in St. Barts, which Sampson will play a role in organizing.Whereas male promoters regularly boasted about their status in terms of the quality of their girls, the status signaling function of girls was noticeably absent in all of the women promoters’ interviews. This is in part because women promoters look like girls; whereas men promoters dress casually in cool t-shirts and sneakers, women promoters wear the obligatory 4” high heels and revealing dresses. They are physically indistinguishable from the girls they broker. Explained Kia:It’s hard being a girl in promotion, because women in the club are just ass, basically. That’s it. Selling girls as sex, and that’s all that girls are there for.- Kia, 20, African American promoter for one year, from NYCThey are also sensitive to being in the disreputable position of brokering girls for money, a paid trade that aligns them closely in the realm of sex work. Three of the five female promoters were adamant that they did not want to be publicly identified as promoters; one of them wears wigs when she goes out, fearing she will spoil her reputation by association as a madam. Rather than being able to use girls to demonstrate their status, these women faced the continual challenge of asserting their right to possess girls as capital in the first place. Finally, in sharp contrast to clients and male promoters, girls seldom discussed business networking as a motivation for going out. They emphasized instead that going out was a fun experience in its own right, with access to free drinks, dinners, and a chance to hang out with their friends, including the promoters. When directly asked about networking opportunities, a few responded with vague allusions to the value of meeting business and political elites. Renee, for instance, responded: “Oh, absolutely, absolutely. Because you meet people, who knows, other people or whatever else, you know, even just like little things”—and she began discussing times she and her friends met celebrities, though most of these encounters she described as brief and sexually charged. One of two girls who prominently discussed networking was a 24 year-old model named Pria from Russia, who claimed to have secured an internship in finance through connections she made in nightclubs. The internship, however, had not yet materialized, and she was still modeling at the time of our interview. While girls certainly meet very important people, they conveyed fewer strategies for how to use these ties.Rather than capitalizing on business ties through their participation in the VIP, girls were more commonly assumed to advance through their romantic involvement with wealthy men. When I asked the client Dante, for example, if girls build businesses via VIP parties as successfully as he has, he nodded enthusiastically: “Some of my friends are married to the richest men in the world.” While men use girls for both romance and as conduits through which they establish valuable business ties with other men, girls are expected to use the VIP to expand their horizons of romantic partners—but, as I show below, this risks being perceived as strategically intimate, akin to stigmatized sex workers.THE SYMBOLIC MEANINGS OF GIRLSWhy is girl capital convertible for men into economic, symbolic, and social capital, but less valuable for the girls who possess it? While “girls” is the dominant term for women in VIP parties, over time in the field I became aware of a typology of girls ordered around their perceived moral qualities, distinct from their physical markers of worth. These are party girls, good girls, and paid girls, all distinct from the social category of women. The symbolic differentiations among girls influence how men in the VIP engage with them, essentially marking most girls as inadequate partners in both business and romantic relationships. Party Girls and Good Girls“Party girls,” a term used mostly by men, denotes women who are regular guests of promoters at VIP parties. They go out often and free of charge. They can be models or good civilians; the term describes not physical attributes but level of participation in the VIP scene. Such girls are seen as generic and interchangeable. One club owner described the tables full of girls at his club as “buffers.” He explained: “Yeah buffers, you know, the girls that are on the yacht in St. Tropez and they’re on the sides in the picture with everybody. The party girls.” The very qualities that render girls ideal for the VIP party – being young and without demanding or regular work so they can go out often and stay out late – marks them as unserious and unpromising partners for either business or long-term romantic involvements. Clients dismiss party girls even if they are in fact students or professionals, as a number of the young women with whom I sat at tables identified. Many are students with majors ranging from fashion, law, business, sociology, and international relations. At various promoter tables, I’ve sat beside women professionals in fields as diverse as accounting and finance to medicine and real estate. Among the 20 girls I interviewed, twelve of them were in professional jobs or in school, with only three of them earning below minimum wage. Despite their range of backgrounds, by virtue of being regular guests of the club, men generally see them as girls who are unstable in their work and personal lives. For example, a finance associate rebuffed the idea that serious women could be found in the club, particularly late at night:Client: These girls will tell you stories that being at the club at two o’clock in the morning is an amazing way to network. No way, that’s bullshit. You don’t do any business at two a.m. except one business! I’m not expecting anything from the women I meet in the club. For me, it’s a red flag. C’mon, who on a Wednesday or Thursday night is out at 2 a.m.? What do they do for a living?Author: They could be students?Client: Students? They should be studying in the library, what the fuck! The education inflation rate is seven percent, and their parents are paying that.- George, 35, White private equity investor from E. EuropeRelated to assumptions of their poor work ethic, party girls are seen as lacking cultural capital and education credentials, rendering them undesirable beyond the VIP scene:Well, every man would be lying if he said he doesn’t like to be around a bunch of beautiful girls. But it’s not the place I look to find a relationship. I just think, a woman who works as a model, she poses and walks the catwalk, I imagine …we would have trouble relating. So I would think I’d have more in common and could talk more with a girl that studies, or a girl that has a career, or is at NYU for example, than one that is brought in to the club by a promoter, and just stands there, and – that’s not fun, I don’t think, to talk to someone who’s there because she’s paid. Or, if not paid, then compensated in some way. I mean, call me crazy! [laughs]- Max, 33, Asian American finance associate from CAConsidering the effort VIP club personnel expend to bring in models, it was surprising how devalued models in particular are outside of the club as clients described them in interviews:I’ve definitely dated some models but there’s few of them that I find interesting. Like a lot of them are just like very young, and don’t know what the fuck they’re doing in their life. … You can generally tell whether a girl has something more to her or is a party girl, or if she’s more interesting. - Anton, 33, White finance associate from ItalyBy “more interesting,” Anton means that he values drive and cultivation in a romantic partner. Models in particular were disparaged for lacking these attributes. Marco, a client and fitness club owner, bluntly put it: “I hate models. You can usually tell by talking to them who’s a model and who isn’t.” Because party girls are thought to be valuable solely in terms of their bodily capital, they are mocked for possessing only bodily capital, and hence, too reliant on their looks:Ricardo: Definitely, most girls out there I expect to be sluts or dumb bitches, basically. Author: Interesting, and what’s a dumb bitch, in your mind?Ricardo: You just recognize when you talk with them, they’re just empty, no word to describe, just empty… If you’re a serious girl, you’re not going out with a promoter, because you don’t need anybody to pay for your drinks. … I might hook up with them but won’t date them, I take them out and they don’t know what sushi is. They say “Oh, what is this? I never tried it before!” No, I can't deal with that.- Ricardo, 23, White, Finance associateIn opposition to the party girl, clients and promoters mobilized the trope of the “good girl,” a social type perceived as a rare exception in the VIP club. Unlike party girls, good girls go out only occasionally, take their careers and education seriously, and are unlikely to be out late on weeknights. Related to perceptions of her privileged and educated position, good girls are valued for their perceived sexual virtue. Dre described someone at his table: “If you are a good girl, you don’t sleep around. Like Anna, she’s a good girl, not a party girl. She’s not out every night.” Party girls are therefore suitable for hookups, while good girls are candidates for relationships. Clients note that while it’s possible to meet a good girl in these clubs, it is unlikely. They are more likely to rely on friends, work, and family ties to meet prospective girlfriends. For instance, Ricardo:Definitely not in the club in NYC or Cannes or St. Tropez, I definitely don’t think I’ll meet a serious girl there. Someone will introduce me to her or she’ll be the daughter of someone I know, or in the family of someone I know. All but four of the 20 clients I interviewed did not expect a long-term relationship to form from meeting girls in the VIP, though half of them had in fact dated girls they met in clubs. Paid GirlsMen in the VIP drew distinctions between party girls and good girls in part on the basis of their perceived sexual morality, meaning rules of sexual conduct (Parrenas 2011). Related to their stigmatized sexual morality, girls are subject to distrust for strategically using their bodily capital for upward mobility. The very fact that she receives free drinks and trips makes a girl suspicious. For example, Luc positioned himself as a victim of girls who strategize for men’s wealth: Client: I mean the Russians, Brazilians, they know what they are doing. Because if they ask for money, it’s a turn off. But they can pretend they like you, and then they ask you slowly and slowly, you end up paying, no matter what. You end up paying. No it’s horrible. I feel like a loser but when you know about it, this is the way it is. It’s like an exchange.Author: How do you find out about it?Client: It’s obvious. Because the girl—the first time you get excited you think, “Oh, she really likes me”—but the next day, you see her with another guy at a different table, with a bigger table, bigger bottles, bigger boats. Bigger this, bigger that. … It’s contradictory because you want easy girls but then on the other side you want good girls. It’s like, it’s confusing. - Luc, 48, white F&B entrepreneur, from FranceLike Luc, most clients expressed weariness of escorts and frequently discussed how to tell if a woman is for hire or if she is “normal,” e.g., if a girl is beautiful and alone at a club in St. Tropez, she is probably an escort. Escorts fall into the social category of paid girls, which encompasses a range of women who are paid to be in the club, including the “bottle girls” (waitresses), who bring the bottles to clients’ tables. Bottle girls are widely described as “slutty” and “gold diggers,” who perform a “dirty job.” Paid girls are disliked for too explicitly engaging in strategic intimacies, that is, the pursuit of intimate relations in order to achieve economic and lifestyle goals. However, as Luc’s comments illustrate, clients also tended to conflate girls with sex workers (“the Russians, Brazilians”) because of their strategic exchange of bodily capital for men’s economic capital. For example, one financial advisor describes the club as a place where girls try to “harpoon” wealthy men (“whales”). Another described girls as “soft hooking,” he explained:The girls don’t even know they’re soft hooking. They’re just enamored by the trips and the clothes and the shoes. They actually never take money. Every now and again someone will pay their rent, but they don’t actually think they’re whores. I don’t think they are. I think they’re just girls.-- Adam, 29, White entrepreneur from CaliforniaGirls, too, draw boundaries between themselves and sex workers. Policing these boundaries and the behavior of each other, girls put down others whom they see as too interested in looking for wealthy men. Such a woman is likely to be called a “slut” or a “bitch,” the latter a term I learned from Eastern Europeans in Cannes. “Bitches” perform sex for money and gifts, as opposed to girls who just want to have fun:Anna, a 23-year-old Czech model, talks about last night’s party and laughingly tells me: “Don’t write about Czech girls are bitches!…“Normal people don't know,” she says, about this VIP world. “I didn’t know. My friend in Milan when I came she was telling me there is free lunch, dinner, party. I was like, ‘Why? ?How can it be?’ If I tell people from back home they think you have to do something more, you know, you have to do a lot, like bitches.”In interviews and informal conversations, girls downplay their interests in meeting men. Romance was conspicuously absent among the girls’ professed motivations for going out, despite almost half of the girls I interviewed having dated a man they met in the VIP scene. In interviews, all but one of the girls firmly stated, as one Lithuanian in Cannes put it, “This is not the place to meet a boyfriend!”Because the party girl enters into an exchange of bodily capital for goods (drinks, dinners, trips, etc.), she exists on the edge of a thin moral boundary separating her from paid girls. In short, clients distrust girls’ motives for being in the VIP scene with promoters. While girls are rich in bodily capital, their capacity to “spend” it beyond the VIP field is limited. Girls in the VIP are mostly assumed to be just for show, valuable within the party or for casual sex, and generally, dismissed. Women While girls are of central importance in making the VIP scene, women are nearly absent. A woman at a promoter’s table would almost always be recognized as a girl, just as clients that purchase bottles are almost always men. Frequently I saw wives and girlfriends join their men at tables, but they were young, rarely appearing over the age of 35, and they did not order or pay the bill. Given the double standard of aging, by about the age of 30, if a girl is still frequently out in this party circuit, clients and promoters assume she is “desperate” and trying to “cash in” on her fading capital to meet a wealthy boyfriend. In short, she is a “loser,” as the client Luc explains: I mean, a 30 year-old girl, she does this, she’s sad actually. You’re 30 and you’re with one of the promoters and go out every night — that’s really sad. It means you’re a bit of a loser, no? No job, no family. You should have a boyfriend by now and be more steady. - Luc, 48, white F&B entrepreneur, from FranceGirl capital is a depreciating asset as women grow older, given the coupling of beauty with youth, but girls are renewable assets for men who can continually refresh their supply of girls. Nor do older women fit in as clients, because women do not buy bottles. In interviews, everyone used male pronouns to describe clients. When asked about women clients, promoters explained that while women occasionally buy bottles, these women are strange or silly exceptions, with wealth assumed to come from their husbands, as one promoter recalls a female client: Yes, there was a one…Her story’s funny. She married this Saudi Arabian, and they got divorced. And I think the settlement is a few hundred—not hundred thousand, a few hundred million. And so when she got the settlement, she just, like, partied her brains out… I don’t think there’s a lot of women, no. Because women—our tendency, if we have that much money, we’ll shop. You know? We’ll shop for clothes and bags. Men, they want to be looked up to. They want that feeling of “Yeah, I’m a man. I’m having this much fun, surrounded by this.”- Vilma, 25, Asian female promoter for three years, from KoreaWomen are understood to be culturally incompatible with the VIP patron role, given the gendered associations of dependency and the organization of the club, which is predicated on men’s heterosexual pursuit of women. Another promoter put it, “You see sometimes well-heeled ladies at tables. But it’s not the norm. I think that’s just how society is, you know, men are the ones that pay the dinner.”During fieldwork, I saw older women at tables on two occasions. The first time, in Miami, a woman who appeared to be in her 50s, wearing a conservative and expensive-looking dress, and she sat at a table with a group of wealthy older gentlemen flanked by models. She was clearly uncomfortable and soon left. (In fact, after a week of parties with a promoter in Miami, I caught a 7 a.m. flight directly from an after-party, and was struck while boarding the plane by the sight of so many older women, whose presence had been near absent from my eyes for the past five days—despite Miami being a longtime retirement haven.) On the second occasion, I was out at a club in NYC, when Penny, a 25 year-old model, and I were asked to move from the table because, the promoter explained, a famous jewelry designer is coming and they need to sit there. He said he would introduce us to the designer. “Hell yeah, I want some jewelry!” Penny said to me. But when the clients arrived to the table, effectively kicking us to the dance floor, Penny was incensed: the client was a middle-aged and heavyset woman. “NUH-Uhh!,” Penny shouted in my ear over the music. “I mean, seriously,” she continued, “Who is that fat old bitch in the club? It’s disturbing. That’s someone’s mother!” Penny looked with disgust at the table and shook her head. As Penny made clear, it is problematic for a woman to be old (and “fat”) at the VIP party. Older gentlemen with white hair were hardly the norm, as most clients in the scene appear younger than 50, but never did their presence elicit such hostility. Even with money to buy a table, social connections, and cultural capital, women may still be excluded if they lack valued bodily capital. This was frustrating to several male clients I interviewed who could not go to clubs with their female “civilian” friends and work associates. Such gendered exclusions bring into sharp relief women’s location in the hierarchy of worth. One finance associate recounted going to a club in a group with a woman from his finance network:She was the only girl among a few guys, they were buying a table, and the club didn’t want to let her in. And she’s a very good-looking girl, 5’4,” you know, she had really tall heels but they gave us a hard time at the door. We were getting a table and they said, “Sorry she can’t come in.” And it became this back and forth, and I felt so bad for her, because this is a girl that’s very pretty and nothing like that had happened to her in her life, you know. Anyway, we all got in, but it was just so awkward. -- Max, 33, Asian American man, Finance associateThis suggests implications for the exclusion of women from business sectors. Max continued: If you go out with someone who’s a business contact, and meet women and party with girls —one of the things we can enjoy talking about is women, like in following-up with the clients… I’ve seen it be a problem for some women in my business… [Clubbing] is very weird because so much of the fun is around pursuing women. … A lot of business is won through experiences like this. VIP clubs make exceptions for women with recognizably large sums of symbolic or economic capital, such as women celebrities, or women who have access to girls, namely, women that work in fashion and modeling agencies, who are welcome because of their ties to fashion models. Generally, however, women have little capital in the VIP field, because it is organized around the value of girls. DISCUSSION: CAPITALIZING ON GIRL CAPITAL Men in the VIP are able to convert girl capital into economic, symbolic, and social capital, which they use to network and climb elite social and business hierarchies. As “sign-bearing capital,” women advance men’s class projects (Skeggs 2004). They are integral to generating a “cool” environment which VIP club operators consciously construct, thereby setting a stage for elite men’s conspicuous displays of wealth and status. Female bodies are more frequently marshaled than men’s bodies to signal elite distinction, but the particular kinds and shapes of these bodies depend on a specific social, cultural, and historical constellation of power and meaning (Otis 2011). Other studies have found that organizations seek women who are young, pretty, and thin to signal distinction (Allison; Hanser 2008; Hoang 2015; Otis 2011). In the global elite leisure scene, the fashion model body is a highly prized symbol of a “very important” space. Historically, women in elite men’s social spaces possessed both bodily and cultural capital. Athenian hetaera, Roman courtesans, and Japanese geisha were valued as skilled intellectual interlocutors, in addition to their beauty and sex appeal. Unlike such historical cases, “the girl” has relatively little cultural capital. That “the girl” is used for elite distinction is not so surprising. After all, elites can consume popular culture to produce distinction and exclusivity, regardless of the cultural contents being consumed (Prieur and Savage 2011). By virtue of occupying the social position of “girl,” men perceive her primary value is in bodily capital alone. Consequently, by using bodily capital to access to the VIP, women enter into an exchange relationship that is morally suspect as strategic intimacy. My concept of strategic intimacy builds upon Viviana Zelizer’s research on the co-mingling of money and intimacy (2005). Strategic intimacy is a variant of what Zelizer theorizes as relational work, the careful management of interpersonal ties and economic exchange, in which people match appropriate relationships, exchange media (gifts, tips, or cash), and intimacy (2005). People enter into strategic intimacies all the time, and they continually negotiate the co-mingling of romance and commerce in everything from sex work, sponsorship (Swader et al. 2012), “treating” (Piess 1986) and even breadwinner marriage. The concept of strategic intimacies is useful to consider the degrees to which partners perceive relationships as strategic, and hence, legitimate or disreputable, and how partners manage such perceptions.Unlike the escort and the bottle girl, the “party girl” does not receive payment to be in the VIP, but like other paid girls, she is suspect for using bodily capital to climb social and economic ladders—or as one client described it, “soft hooking.” However, this very exchange is one that VIP men engage routinely and with relative ease. Success as a girl at the VIP party is precisely what detracts from her value beyond the party, where elite men look to each other for business, and where consider “good girls” only as romantic partners. Women clearly gain benefits as they circulate through these luxurious scenes; they gain access to the high-status world of business elites and celebrities, and they get access to a dating pool of rich men, although this benefit is tempered by the whore stigma and the distrust men exhibit toward them by virtue of their position as girls in nightclubs. Compared to men’s social, symbolic, and economic capital however, drinks and dinners are relatively ephemeral benefits and not asset growing as is the revenue they generate for the clubs. Nor are these perks likely to afford women as much potential in the long term as are the social ties which men generate with each other. Ethnography has methodological limits to investigate these long-term business outcomes and their role in forging institutional power (e.g. Domhoff 1979); however, interviews with clients confirm their economic interests in being at the VIP parties among other elites, and notably in interviews, women do not reference networks and social capital to the same extent.Previous feminist scholars have concluded that as “vessels of signs,” women are in a double bind (Otis 2011, p. 22). Because beauty and femininity are thought to be at odds with intellect and professional competence, to successfully reflect on men’s status with feminine beauty is to lose out on realms with greater status and rewards—and all the while, women’s embodied capital depreciates in value over time (Greene 2013; McCall 1992). This article both confirms and explains this scholarship by showing how men draw moral boundaries among women who participate in parties for the global elite. By succeeding as prized girl capital in the VIP space, women entered into a symbolic constellation of failed moral character encompassing a lack of cultural capital, economic dependency, and the twin failures to be committed either as sexual partners or as workers. As such, beauty is a mobility strategy, but it is more valuable for men than for women.CONCLUSIONThe gendered and unequal uses of girls as capital has implications for the study of capital conversions and stratification. Girl capital, like all capitals, is useful to explain advantages conferred in specific fields. Unlike the multiplication of similar concepts around embodied cultural capital, this analysis of girl capital is useful not only because it describes personal advantages and rewards in a field, but because it reveals accumulation and appropriation dynamics of a type of cultural capital, and suggests the beginnings of a critical theory of ownership of the forms of capital.Marx’s original critique of capitalist production hinged on ownership to establish his central claim, that owners of capital and the means of production are able to appropriate surplus value from laborers, who are unable to benefit beyond the immediate wage-labor exchange (1977). A political economy of Bourdieu’s forms of cultural capital would begin by outlining four parts: 1) systems of ownership, by considering who profits from the value of symbolic and cultural capital; 2) mechanisms of acquisition, by considering how one actor establishes ownership from another’s cultural capital; 3) mechanisms of conversion, with attention to how unequal conversions happen from one’s cultural capital. Towards these ends, scholars should attend to the limits of capital’s convertibility, for example by addressing the differences between short and long-term gains, and how various kinds of capital can or cannot be converted in other fields. Girls’ bodily capital, in this instance, is limited to short-term profit in the VIP field, whereas men’s girl capital is convertible for resources beyond in business and political fields in the form of social ties and business deals. Finally, such a theory should attend to 4) mechanisms of producing consent. The women in this study were willing and even eager participants in the VIP scene. That people take pleasure in systems that are vastly unequal calls for analyses of both the conditions of inequality and the subjective desires that drive consent to them (Hamilton 2007). Future scholarship should consider the role of consent and subjective pleasures of being circulated and appropriated. For instance, do people know when their embodied capital is being appropriated, and to what extent does consent enable the unequal transubstantiation of capital?By highlighting ownership, scholars can attend to systemic inequalities in capital conversion processes. In a rare posing of this question, Wacquant analyzes a system of ownership of bodily capital in the circulation of bodies in the boxing circuit, tracing the social and emotional the mechanism through which men’s bodies consent to a market structure that extracts value from them, thus transforming their bodily capital into “pugilistic capital” that is owned and controlled by brokers (1995). Such an approach could be usefully applied to cultural production fields, for instance fashion modeling, the bodily capital of models leads not only to financial and symbolic rewards for young women (Mears 2011), but to disproportionate economic gains for owners of luxury fashion conglomerates. To take the example of “spatial capital,” the approach outlined here shifts the emphasis from individuals’ advantages in cities (Centner 2008) onto the urban boosters and corporate interests who engineer the presence of young professionals in their neighborhoods, reaping enormous and invisible benefits as a consequence. Finally, women’s “erotic capital” reaps some personal advantages (Hakim 2010), but women’s commitments to beauty projects most likely generate vastly unequal benefits to beauty and fashion industry owners. Across such disparate cases, questions of ownership should be explored to consider mechanisms of appropriation: what forms does appropriation take, what subjective beliefs must be constructed to enable value-extraction from someone’s capital, and how are these processes specific to fields? This research presents the case for greater engagement with political economy in studies of cultural capital, with a call to shift sociological interest from how capitals function as personal advantages, to how systems of power relations enable unequal value accumulation from the resources one possesses in one’s own body. REFERENCESAllison, Anne. 1994. Nightwork: Sexuality, Pleasure, and Corporate Masculinity in a Tokyo Hostess Club: University of Chicago Press.Anderson, Tammy L. Catherine Grunert, Arielle Katz and Samantha Lovascio. 2010. “Aesthetic Capital: A Research Review on Beauty Perks and Penalties.” Sociology Compass 4(8):564–575.Armstrong, Elizabeth A., Laura T. Hamilton, Elizabeth M. Armstrong and J. Lotus Seeley. 2014. ''Good Girls'': Gender, Social Class, and Slut Discourse on Campus. Social Psychology Quarterly 2014 77: 100 Atkinson, Anthony B. and Thomas Piketty. 2010. Top Incomes in Global Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University PressBecker, Gary. 1994. Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis With Special Reference to Education. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press._____. 1986. “The Forms of Capital.” Pp. 241-58 in Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, edited by J. G. Richardson. New York, Greenwood Press. Charmaz, Kathy. 2001. “Grounded Theory.” Pp. 335– 52 in Contemporary Field Research: Perspectives and Formulations, edited by R. Emerson. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.Chancer, Lynn S. 1998. Reconcilable Differences: Confronting Beauty, Pornography, and the Future of Feminism. Berkeley: University of California Press.Centner, Ryan. 2008. “Places of Privileged Consumption Practices: Spatial Capital, the Dot-Com Habitus, and San Francisco's Internet Boom.” City & Community 7(3):193-223. Clemens, Elizabeth Alice. 2006. Love for Sale: Courting, Treating, and Prostitution in New York City, 1900-1945. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Collins, Randall. 1992. ‘Women and the Production of Status Cultures’, in Michèle Lamont and Marcel Fournier (eds) Cultivating Differences: Symbolic Boundaries and the Making of Inequality. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Conti, Alie. 2014. “Prostitutes Steal Millions and Walk Free.” New Times.. , Paul. 1982. “Cultural Capital and School Success.” American Sociological Review 47:189-201.Domhoff, William G. 1979. The Powers That Be. New York: Random House.Elberse, Anita, Ryan Barlow and Sheldon Wong. 2009. “Marquee: The Business of Nightlife.” Harvard Business School Case N2-509-012.Entwistle, Joanne and Elizabeth Wissinger. 2012. Fashioning Models: Image, Text and Industry. London: Berg.FT, 2012. “Lifestyle nomads.” Teresa Levonian Cole. Financial Times July 6: , Erving. 1967. Interaction Ritual. New York: Doubleday.Grazian, David. 2008. On the Make: The Hustle of Urban Nightlife. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Green, Adam I. 2008. "The Social Organization of Desire: The Sexual Fields Approach." Sociological Theory 26(1): 25-50._____. 2011. “Playing the (Sexual) Field: The Interactional Basis of Systems of Sexual Stratification.” Social Psychology Quarterly 74(3): 244-266._____. 2013. “‘Erotic capital’ and the Power of Desirability: Why ‘Honey Money’ is a Bad Collective Strategy for Remedying Gender Inequality.” Sexualities 16: 137-158. Gusterson, Hugh. 1997. “Studying Up Revisited.” Political and Legal Anthropology Review 201:114–119.Hakim, Catherine. 2010. "Erotic Capital." European Sociological Review 26:499-518.Halttunen, Karen. 1982. Confidence Men and Painted Women: A Study of Middle-class Culture in America, 1830-1870. New Haven: Yale University Press.Hamilton, Laura. 2007. “Trading on heterosexuality: College women’s gender strategies and homophobia.” Gender & Society 21:145-72. Hammermesh, Daniel. 2011. Beauty Pays. Why Attractive People are More Successful. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.Hanser, Amy. 2008. Service Encounters: Class, Gender, and the Market for Social Distinction in Urban China: Stanford University Press.Hoang, Kimberley. Forthcoming. Dealing in Desire: Asian Ascendency, Western Decline, and the Hidden Currencies in Global Sex Work. University of California Press.Huppatz, Kate. 2009. “Reworking Bourdieu’s ‘capital’: feminine and female capitals in the field of paid caring work.” Sociology 43(1): 45–66.Karabel, Jerome and A. H. Halsey. 1977. Power and Ideology in Education. Oxford University Press.Khan, Shamus Rahman. 2012. “The Sociology of Elites.” Annual Review of Sociology 38: 361-377.Kusenbach, Margaret. 2003. “Street Phenomenology: The Go-Along Method.” Ethnography 4:455 485.Lamont, Michelle and Virag Molnar. 2002. “The Study of Boundaries in the Social Sciences.” Annual Review of Sociology 28:167–95. Latham, Angela J. 2000. Posing a Threat: Flappers, Chorus Girls, and Other Brazen Performers of the American 1920s. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.Lovell, Terry. 2000. “Thinking feminism with and against Bourdieu.” Feminist Theory 1: 11–32.Martin, John Levi and Matt George. 2006. “Theories of Sexual Stratification: Toward an Analytics of the Sexual Field and a Theory of Sexual Capital.” Sociological Theory 24(2):107-132. Marx, Karl. 1977. Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, Vol. 1. New York: Vintage.May, Reuen. A. B., and Kenneth Sean Chaplin. 2008. “Cracking the Code: Race, Class, and Access to Nightclubs in Urban America.” Qualitative Sociology 31:57–72.McCall, Leslie. 1992. “Does Gender Fit? Bourdieu, Feminism, and Conceptions of Social Order.” Theory and Society 21: 837–67.Mears, Ashley. 2011. Pricing Beauty: The Making of a Fashion Model. Berkeley: University of California Press.Neveu, ?rik. 2013. “Les sciences sociales doivent-elles accumuler les capitaux?” Revue Fran?aise de Science Politique 63(2):337-358.Osburg, John. 2013. Anxious Wealth: Money and Morality Among China's New Rich. Stanford University Press. Parre?as, Rhacel. 2011. Illicit Flirtations. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.Piess, Kathy. 1986. Cheap Amusements: Working Women and Leisure in Turn-of-the-Century New York. Temple University Press. Prieur, Annick and Mike Savage. 2013. “Emerging Forms of Cultural Capital. European Societies 15(2): 246-267. Rivera, Lauren A. 2010. "Status Distinctions in Interaction: Social Selection and Exclusion at an Elite Nightclub." Qualitative Sociology 33:229-255._____. 2012. “Hiring as Cultural Matching: The Case of Elite Professional Service Firms.” American Sociological Review 77(6): 999-1022.Rossman, Gabriel. 2014. “Obfuscatory Relational Work and Disreputable Exchange.” Sociological Theory 32: 43-63.Sanders, Lise Shapiro. ?2006. ?Consuming Fantasies: Labor, Leisure, and the London Shopgirl, 1880 – 1920. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.Shilling, Chris. 1993. The Body and Social Theory. London: Sage.Sherman, Rachel. 2007. Class Acts: Service And Inequality in Luxury Hotels. Berkeley: University of California Press.Skeggs, Beverley. 2004. “Context and Background: Pierre Bourdieu’s Analysis of Class, Gender and Sexuality.” In Feminism After Bourdieu: International Perspectives Edited by Lisa Adkins and Beverley Skeggs. Oxford: Blackwell.Sombart, Werner. 1976 [1922]. Luxury and Capitalism. University of Michigan Press.Swader, Christopher S., et al. 2012. “Love as a Fictitious Commodity: Gift-for-Sex Barters as Contractual Carriers of Intimacy Compensated dating.” Sexuality and Culture.Thornton, Sarah. 1995. Club Cultures: Music, Media and Subcultural Capital. London: Polity Press. Wacquant, Loic. 1995. “Pugs at Work: Bodily Capital and Bodily Labour among Professional Boxers.” Body & Society 1:65-93.Webster, Murray and James Driskell. 1983. “Beauty as Status.” The American Journal of Sociology 89:140–165.Weinbaum, Alys Eve, Lynn Thomas, Priti Ramamurthy, Uta Poiger, Madeline Dong, andTani Barlow. 2008. "The Modern Girl as a Heuristic Device: Collaboration, Connective Comparison, Multidirectional Citation." in The Modern Girl Around the World: Consumption, Modernity, and Globalization, edited by A. E. Weinbaum, L. Thomas, P. Ramamurthy, U. Poiger, M. Dong, and T. Barlow. Durham: Duke University Press.Weitzer, Ronald. 2000. Sex for Sale: Prostitution, Pornography, and the Sex Industry (pp. 7–32). New York: Routledge.Zelizer, Viviana. 2005. The Purchase of Intimacy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download