The Columnist Manifesto

What do Jeremy Freese and Karl Marx know that the rest of us should know?

World famous yet still youthful social scientist Jeremy Freese recently offered this insight into "romantic success":

in Heterosexual World, ... boys and girls are handed different roadmaps marking out the alternative routes to romantic success. Roughly, at least, the prevailing picture still seems to be that, if you are a woman, you can either (1) Be Attractive or (2) Be Amenable, where (2) can take on a variety of different meanings depending on the socio-cultural-lifecoursical situation. Meanwhile, for men, you can either (1) Be Attractive or (2) Be Accomplished.

160 years previously, at a stage of his career only slightly less advanced than Jeremy's, up-and-coming social scientist Karl Marx, wrote this:

That which is for me through the medium of money – that for which I can pay (i.e., which money can buy) – that am I, the possessor of the money. The extent of the power of money is the extent of my power.... I am ugly, but I can buy for myself the most beautiful of women. Therefore I am not ugly, for the effect of ugliness – it’s deterrent power – is nullified by money. [Marx, Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844]

To summarize the "road maps" for male romantic success:

Freese: (1) be attractive or (2) be accomplished.
Marx: (1) be attractive or (2) be wealthy.

Wealth being the primary form of accomplishment in Marx's heyday-of-industrial-capitalism milieu, they're pretty much saying the same thing.

Freese's neo-Marxian post was an extended riff on the problem of male shortness, in which accomplishment (for Marx, wealth) compensates for lack of physical stature.

How tall was Karl Marx? According to the Spartacus website, Marx was

of medium height, broad-shouldered, powerful in build, and vigorous in his movements. His forehead was high and finely shaped, his hair thick and pitch-black, his gaze piercing.

Other than perhaps "hair thick and pitch-black," they could have been describing Professor Freese. One can't help but wonder: is this a question of "great minds think alike," or is there in particular a common perspective among minds similarly housed behind shapely foreheads and carried vigorously on broad, powerful shoulders, gazing out at the world from medium height?

****