Bonnie Blue and the double measuring stick

A few days ago, Bonnie Blue – the British adult content creator who has carried out sexual challenges with hundreds of men – shared her latest "exhibition" on social media. Six months pregnant, she has staged what is called a baby shower, a no longer new and neoconservative trend that serves to announce the sex of the baby to be born. In this case, however, she has done so accompanied by more than 100 men – many of them with their faces covered – and carrying out various sexual practices. The objective: to share it on social media. Obviously, it has gone viral, as it does every time she takes an action.The complete analysis of the meaning and interpretation of this action (both regarding her and the men involved) requires several debates that have already taken place in some media and also on social networks; therefore, I do not want to talk here about what is a current dilemma in feminisms about the weight of the patriarchal structure in these practices or women's right to their bodies. I believe there is a parallel reflection that is often overlooked because it ends up being invisible to the eyes in the face of situations that are, from the outset, disturbing to us.I would like to address this topic: how glaring and classist the double standard is in contemporary capitalist society. Despite all the social criticisms that the character of Bonnie Blue has generated throughout her career, her situation is privileged. Behind this latest "performance", as with the previous ones, there is monetization. On her part, on the part of the companies that own the different social networks and perhaps – we don't know – on the part of the men who accompany her. The entire situation is at the service of capitalism; it is a business. And, as far as I know, no child protection institution has decided to monitor the pregnancy, nor what this woman's context might be for being a mother, nor to investigate the men around her or their role. Bonnie is European, white, and has become rich; despite the criticisms, she is ultimately accepted as an "exercise" of freedom or even as an exercise in provocation towards "bleeding hearts".This supposed "freedom" is only offered by social class. It's the usual story: Bonnie Blue will most likely be immune to institutional "guardianship" as a mother. And I don't mean by this that we should start evaluating her maternal capacities or even the type of parenting she wants to do; what I'm talking about is that we have a system that, structurally, ends up questioning mostly the pregnancies and maternities of poor, immigrant, racialized women, those who use drugs, those who don't have a safe home, etc. What I mean is that institutions end up being a reflection of societies and how they interpret reality. The stigma and rejection of women living in profound social vulnerability also impact their maternities.We are legitimizing a world that whitewashes what we would not want to admit as long as it is done by someone who, in some way, belongs to our "tribe". Let's exercise ourselves: if the woman who had carried out this action were poor and racialized, what would we have done, said?