Quite the contrary. Any book on evolutionary psychology will explain to you why women are desired (in part) for their sexuality while men are desired more (in part) for their brawn, etc.

In short, women are sexually pursued (rather than men) because evolution. Female eggs are scarce and precious (and thus to be pursued sexually) while male sperm is cheap and plentiful. The more rare thing is always there more valued/desired. A female competing for access to male sperm makes about as much sense as competing for air.

There are a few species of animals (birds, frogs, etc.) where the roles are reversed--where the female's eggs are cheap and plentiful and the male sperm less so. In those species, the females invariably pursue the males for sex rather than vice versa.

Men are actually pursued by women, just for different reasons (brawn, resources, etc.).

To diminish a women's ability to market her most evolutionarily valuable asset would be like denying men the ability to market their's--their brawn. What if we were taught to believe that selling our labor (brawn) was shameful while selling our sex appeal was commendable? Silly, right? But only as silly as the reverse.

Women don't have to "earn" their way in the world as much as men do. They already have what most every man wants. So...who is zooming whom here? Females only lose when they are shamed into giving away their most valueable asset rather than selling it like everyone else does.

And actually, they do sell it. They just sell it secretly, and in ways the men find acceptable because they can manage and control it better.