Sex WorkSex Act Law, Labor, and Desire in Constructions of Prostitution

Sex Work/SexAct:Law,Labor,and
Desirein Constructions
ofProstitution
Noah D. Zatz
S EX RADICALS
radical feminists,1
(Rubin 1984; Weeks 1985) oftenargue that
in theiropposition to pornography, prostitu-
tion,sadomasochism,and othercontroversial sex practices,make
politicalcommoncause withsexual conservatives. Whilesex radi-
cals themselvesclearly,indeedalmostbydefinition, do not forgepolitical
coalitionswiththe sexual Right,theydo tendto includeprostitution in
theiranalysisof "deviant"and "perverse"sexualities,thusmakingtheo-
reticalcommoncause withright-wing articulationsbetweencommercial
sex and eroticdiversity.
Whilesuchan analysismakesa good deal of sense
giventhe historicalconnectionsbetweencondemnations/prosecutions of
prostitution and political suppression of erotic in
diversity general,2it
overlookswhat is most subversiveabout prostitution: its open challenge
bothto theidentification of sex acts withacts of desireand to theoppo-
sitionbetweenerotic/affective activityand economiclife.This articleat-
tempts a somewhat different articulation of sex work by drawingupon
theorizationsof prostitutiongeneratedby the prostitutes'rightsmove-
ment,Michel Foucault'sinsightthatlegal suppressionand rhetoricalcon-
demnationmay be mechanismsof socioculturalproductionas well as
Thisarticle,andmythinking aboutrelated
subjects,ofcourseowesdebtsto countless
people.Mythanks to BiddyMartin,
especially Kathryn Abrams, AnnaMarieSmith, Eliza-
bethPovinelli, LynneAbel,andJessicaCattelino fortheircomments, anden-
criticisms,
couragement. Comments fromtheSignseditors andreviewershavealso beeninvaluable in
refiningandreworking myargument andresearch.Thismaterial is basedon worksup-
portedundera NationalScienceFoundation graduateresearchfellowship.
I usethetermradicalonlybecauseofthepopularity oftheliberal/socialist/radical
framework fordiscussingfeminism andbecauseofitshistoricalassociationwitha par-
ticularbrandoffeminism thathasseensexincontemporary Euro-American societies
as
fundamentally aboutwomen's violentsubordinationto menand,conversely, women's op-
pression as primarilya functionofmalesexualviolence(as exemplified intheanti-
pornography campaign). Forclearapplications
oftheliberal/socialist/radical
framework
to prostitution,seeJaggar 1991;Fechner 1994.
2 Walkowitz
1980;DuBoisandGordon1984;Nestle1987;Bell1994.
[Signs:Journalof Womenin Cultureand Society1997,vol.22, no. 2]
? 1997 byTheUniversityofChicago.Allrights reserved.
0097-9740/97/2202-0001$01.00
Winter 1997 SIGNS 277
This content downloaded from 192.148.225.018 on September 08, 2017 03:15:04 AM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
Zatz SEX WORK/SEX ACT
repression,constructivisthistories/theories
of sexualityand identity, and
feministcritiquesof thepublic/privateand work/family divides.3In light
of these traditions,I hope to thinkthroughthe failureof most major
normativetheoriesof prostitution to deal adequatelybothwiththecom-
of
plexities sex, desire,labor, and moneyfoundin thepracticeand with
the implicationsof prostitution'scriminalizationfor its relationshipto
hegemonicsexual and economicpractices.
What is prostitution?
As AlisonJaggar(1991) astutelypointsout,thedefinition of prostitu-
tionis as contestedas itslegal and moralstatus.My discussionof prosti-
tutionis orientedtowarditspractice,and the debatesoverthatpractice,
in the late twentieth-century UnitedStates. It is quite commonto talk
gliblyof prostitution as theworld'soldestprofession,existinguniversally
across time and place (Alexander1987b, 186). Such talk obscuresthe
differences in social and culturalcontext-differencesin economicor-
ganization,normativesexual practices,and therelationshipbetweensex-
ual practicesand identity, betweeneconomicpracticesand identity, and
so on-that shape the significance and structureof prostitutionwithin
any particularhistoricalspace.4
That beingsaid, the prostitution of the hereand now is not radically
isolatedfromotherpracticescommonlytermedprostitution; rather,it is
the productof historicaldevelopmentthat,as with any othersociocul-
tural object, resultsin shiftingregionsof continuityand discontinuity
withpast practicesand discourses.So, forinstance,the economicsand
erotics of contemporaryEuro-Americanprostitutionare clearly out-
growthsof the increasedregulationof prostitutes, marginalizedsexual
groups, racialized minorities,and theworking classes aroundtheturnof
thecentury(Walkowitz1980; McClintock1992; Bell 1994). Prostitution
in the UnitedStatesand otherEuro-Americancountrieshas been influ-
enced by colonial historiesthathave producedraced patternsof desire,
migration,and economicinequalitythatleavetheirmarkon bothprosti-
tutesand clients(McClintock1992; Shrage1992, 1994). Similarly, forms
of prostitution in SoutheastAsia, India, and Kenya,forinstance,share
particularhistoriesof theinteractionof precolonialsexual and domestic
practiceswithcolonial and postcolonialphenomenasuch as demandfor
3 For writingsby and about theprostitutes' rightsmovement, see Delacoste and Alex-
ander 1987; Bell 1987; Pheterson1989; and Jenness1993. Foucault'sconstructivist cri-
tique of the "repressivehypothesis"is set out in The Historyof Sexuality(1978). On sexu-
alityand identitymoregenerally, see Vance 1984; Laclau and Mouffe1985; and Bell
1994. On work/family, see Olsen 1983; Ferguson1989; and Williams1991.
4 White
1986; Shrage1989, 1994; Bell 1994.
278 SIGNS Winter 1997

SEX WORK/SEX ACT Zatz
sexual servicesby Britishand Americansoldiersor the Thai state'sreli-

ance on sex tourismto providecapitalto repayinternational debts(White
1986; Scibelli 1987; Oldenburg1990).
For thepurposesof thisarticle,prostitution mightbe provisionally de-
finedas attendingto the sexual desiresof a particularindividual(or in-
dividuals)with bodilyacts in exchangeforpaymentof money.5Such a
definitionimmediatelyraises severalquestions.First,are the actors just
anyone?Many feministshave been inclinedto say "no" emphatically,
insistingon prostitution as paradigmaticallywomen (presumedstraight)
to
selling straight men. This approach renders invisiblethe fact that a
significantnumberof prostitutesare lesbian or bisexual,that thereis a
significantamountof prostitution involvingsex betweengay or bisexual
men,and thatthereis a largelyundocumentedhistoryof commercialsex
betweenwomen (Nestle 1987);6 yet,it is nonethelesstruethat the vast
majorityof prostitutes are womenwithmale clientsand thatthistypeof
prostitution has garneredthemostattentionin Euro-Americansocieties.
There appears to be verylittleprostitution in whichmen sell to women.
This lastfactis usuallyattributed to genderedstructures of desire(Shrage
1994), althoughsome haveclaimedthatit is caused as muchbywomen's
historicallack of disposable income and personal freedom(Bell 1987,
217). Prostitution is both a practicein whichgenderand sexualityplay
importantstructuring roles and one that cannot simplybe reduced to
genderor sexuality.
Some writershave claimedthatprostitution is not "really"about sex
or moneyat all but instead is about power and sexual subordination
(Pateman 1988). Of course, thereis no reason to assume that sex and
moneydo not alreadyhave everything to do withpowerand sexual sub-
ordination.Again, it is importantto acknowledgeconnectionsbetween
conceptsand phenomenawithoutsimplyreducingthemto each other.In
additionto crushingconceptualcomplexityand culturalvarietyunder
5 It is worthnotingthatthisroughdefinition, despiteitsconsiderablevagueness,al-
readyfailsto capturea varietyof historicaland contemporary examplesthatone mightre-
ferto as "prostitution." For instance,in theUnitedStates,womenhave historically been
classifiedas prostitutes on the basis of the numberof sexual partners,regardlessof any
commercialaspect (Scibelli1987). HistoricalexamplesfromancientBabylonand colonial
Kenyasuggestthatsexual acts accompaniedby monetaryexchangemayhave been linked
as muchto spiritualdevelopmentor themaintenanceof a household,respectively, as to
thesatisfactionof eroticdesires(Shrage1994). Note also thatthisdefinition failsto distin-
guishprostitution clearlyfromotherkindsof sex workmediated,as withanything, by
"bodilyacts" such as posingfora photographor performing on stage-the linesare ex-
ceedinglyblurry, sinceprostitutes maynot be asked forphysicalcontactat all but instead
fora privateperformance of some othersexual fantasy.
6 Radical feminists have acknowledgedtheexistenceof male-maleprostitution but
have generallyincorporatedit intotheiranalysisof womensellingto men by understand-
ing male prostitutes as feminizedstand-insforwomen (MacKinnon 1989, 141; Fechner
1994, 49, n. 95).

theheelof totalizingtheory, sucha moveencouragesus to forgetthevari-

of
ety meanings thatparticipationin a "single"practicecan havefordif-
ferentindividualsor groups,evenwithina singlehistoricalmoment(Bell
1994, 73); thereis greatevidenceto suggest,forinstance,thatprostitutes
experiencetheirprofessionin widelyvaryingways and thatjohns go to
prostitutes forsimilarlyvariousreasons(Fechner1994). In emphasizing
thatcontextis essentialto understanding a phenomenonlikeprostitution,
it is crucialto recognizethat "context"is not itselfunitary;rather,con-
text is always fraughtwith heterogeneity, paradox, and difference that
may, for instance,make the same "event" transpire in different"con-
texts"fordifferent individuals(Derrida 1982; Laclau 1990a).
With this view in mind,one can begin to understandthat more is
at stake in disagreements overhow to describeprostitution than simply
which approach is the truerrepresentation of reality.Although,in gen-
eral, any descriptiveclaim will necessarilydraw upon broad theoretical
commitments, this mediationof experienceby already-existing under-
standingsof theworldand one's place in it (Scott1992; Mohanty1993)
is particularlyimportantwhen how and whyparticipantsexperiencea
practice(as degrading,as shameful,as fun,as erotic,as liberating)ought
to play a crucial role in evaluatingit, as is the case with prostitution.
Holly Fechner,forinstance,asks thewrongquestionwhenshe framesher
inquiryas follows:"Each theoryrepresentswomen'slives because they
are all formulatedfromthe standpointof some women. The relevant
question is ... which, if any, representsmost closely the experiences of
womenin prostitution in a particulartimeand place" (1994, 63).
The experiencesof women in prostitution will have quite a bit to do
both withunderlying featuresof theirsituationand withhow theyhave
learnedto understand, interpret,and explaintheworldaroundthem.Dif-
ferenttheoriesof prostitution, linked as theyare to particularunder-
standingsof sexuality,gender,commercialexchange,specificsexual acts,
and so on, and to the extenttheyinformtheexperiencesof participants
in prostitution byhelpingto constitute theirinterpretivelensor byplaying
a role in constructing the contextthatconstrainstheirexperiences(e.g.,
by influencing legal provisionsor the attitudesof police,clients,friends,
family, etc.), play a role in the productionof experienceas well. Partof
the relevant"context" for understandingand evaluatingprostitution,
then,mustbe thediscursiveresourcesthroughwhichit is interpreted and
contested.
An adequate understanding of prostitution
requiresunderstanding its
multiplicity and the potentialdiscontinuities in the experienceof pros-
titutionbetweenparticipantsin it, as well as betweenparticipantsand
dominantnarrativesof thecultureat large(Vance 1984, 15). In particu-

lar, one mustconsiderwhat makes an act "sexual" or "erotic."Having

disentangledsexualityfromgenitalcontact (an idea rooted in the sup-
posed naturallinkbetweensexual desireand procreativesex), construc-
tivisttheoriesof sexualityneed to considerboth that sexualitymay be
nongenitaland thatgenitaliamaybe nonsexual.
At least since Freud'swritingson fetishismand pregenitalsexuality
(1962), eroticdesireand sexual pleasurehave been understoodas cru-
ciallymediatedby a psychologicalcomponent,a component,moreover,
heavilyinfluencedby culturallyspecificpatternsand practicesof desire
and pleasure(Koedt 1972; Vance 1984). Considerableattentionhas been
devotedto explainingand criticizing how particularsexual behaviors,es-
peciallyintercoursebetweena man and a woman,have been naturalized
and normalizedthroughteleologicalidentifications of sexualitywithpro-
creationand in conjunctionwiththemaintenanceand productionof pa-
triarchalformsof social organization(Rubin 1975, 1984; Weeks 1985).
Much of thiscriticalenergyhas legitimizednonprocreative sexual activi-
tiesand criticizedsexual practicesorganizedprimarily forthepleasureof
men (Koedt 1972; Ehrenreich, Hess, and Jacobs 1986; Davis 1990).
Althoughculturaland individualvariationin what acts,partners,ob-
jects,partsof the body,and so on, are loci of sexual desireand pleasure
is widelyrecognized,and theproductionof thoseloci is understoodas a
thoroughlysocial process,the lingeringinfluenceof procreativeteleol-
ogy is still recognizable.In contrastto effortsto legitimizenonprocre-
ative,and sometimesnongenital,behaviorsas formsof eroticexperience
(Rubin 1984; McClintock 1992) or to rejectdominantformsof sexual
practice(Koedt 1972; Davis 1990), much less culturalwork has been
orientedtowardimagininggenitalencounters(usuallytaken as paradig-
maticallysexual) as de-eroticized
interactions,inwhichtheabsenceofsex-
ual pleasure mightbe no less surprisingor disappointingthan in an
ordinaryhandshake.7Moreover,despitenew appreciationforautoeroti-
cismand object-oriented eroticism,sexualityis primarilyunderstoodand
7 On theanecdotal
level,I knowofsomegaymenandlesbianswhohaveconsidered
having"sex" witha friend strictlyforthepurposeofhavinga child,fully expectingto ex-
perience theactas instrumentally aimedat procreationwithout anytraceoferoticism, an
interesting reversalofsame-sex eroticismfreeofanyprocreativeintentorpossibility.
In
herbookMoralDilemmasofFeminism, LaurieShrageinpassingwonders whetherBaby-
lonianreligious ritualsinvolving intercoursebetweena mananda womanshouldeven
be referred to as "sex" at all (1994,121). Givenherposition that"forcible
violationof
womenis theessenceofsex,"Catharine MacKinnon also speculates,
"Is intercourse
'sex'
at all?" (1989,141). Oncegenitalinteractions aredecenteredinourunderstanding ofsex-
uality,neither limitingtheextent oferoticactivitynornecessarily
playing anyroleinit
whatsoever, thedistinctions between andotherforms
prostitution ofsexworkbeginto
blur,sinceeachrelieson a particular setoferoticfantasiesandmaterial while
practices,
nonehasa privileged relationship to an essential
coreofsexuality.

experiencedas thoroughly relationaland reciprocal:sex happensbetween

people, and personA cannotbe havingsex withpersonB with-
therefore
out personB havingsex withpersonA.8
The eroticstatusof an act or bodypartmaydifferbetweentwo actors
engagedin a singleact. I takeitnotto be especiallyfar-fetched to imagine
a situationin which,forone person,stimulationof theleftear is a major
eroticfocus,while forsomeone doing the stimulating, it is just an ear.
Thereis no reasonwhythesamecould notbe trueforgenitalinteractions.
Afterjettisoningthenotionthatcertainkindsof behaviorare inherently
erotic(eithermutuallyor asymmetrically), one can imaginerelationsbe-
tweenbodieswhoseconnectionto eroticdesirerequiresparticularknowl-
edgenot onlyofthephysicalconfiguration butalso ofthepersonalhistor-
ies oftheindividualsinvolvedand thecontextin whichtherelationoccurs
(e.g., it onlyworksin a bedroom,or on a Tuesday,or withsomeoneyou
love,or witha completestranger, or in thedark).
Competing narrativesof prostitution

Prostitutionhas been compared to many things,articulatedwithin
manydiscourses.I concernmyselfhereonlywiththoseprojectsmaking
some claimto be feminist,progressive,or otherwiseliberatory. In particu-
I of
lar, do notdiscusstheories prostitution that focus on sin,promiscuity,
or disease,althoughtheyhavebeenamongthemostimportant in shaping
thepopularimagination.I focuson thefollowingmodelsforunderstand-
ing prostitution:freecontract/autonomous action, subordinatedlabor,
subordinatedsex, and sexual pluralism,whichroughlycorrespondto the
commonlydistinguishedapproachesof liberalfeminism, Marxist femi-
nism, radical feminism,and sex radicalism.It should be no surprisethat
thelinesbetweentheseapproachesare blurryat best,and morethanone
may be presentin the writingsof a singlecritic.Drawingout some of
thegaps and limitationsin thesepredominantapproaches,mygoal is to
contributepieces of anotherpossible organizingnarrative,one thatad-
dressessome of theseproblems.
My investigation has been formatively influencedby the storiesthat
prostitutesthemselveshave told about theirlives,perspectives thatI hope
8 thisdoesnotimply
Obviously thatpleasure, andconsent
activity, arenecessarily
sym-
Oneparticipant,
metrical. maybe boredto tears,butonewouldnormally
forinstance, un-
derstandhersituationas badsexratherthanno sexat all. Rape,whileclearly involving
inthesenseofconsent,
lackofreciprocity nonethelessis generallyunderstood andexperi-
encedas beingforcedto havesex.As SharonMarcusargues,itis "theforced of
creation
as a violatedinnerspace,"notthephysical
femalesexuality thatconstitutes
assaultitself,
thehorrorofrape(1992,399).

to juxtaposewithsome of thetheoriesin question.9Sex workersare not

of a singlevoice withrespectto prostitution. There are, however,a few
prominent themes that emergequite frequently: choice, work,violence,
police, and deception.Of these,choice, work, and violence are major
playersin academictheoryon thesubject(each beingthemajor themeof
liberal, Marxist, and radical feministapproaches, respectively), while
police and are
deception hardlythought about at all. What is more,work
is, I think,oftenmistheorizedbecause of difficulties describingexactly
what the "product"of theprostitute's workis, whiletherole of violence
is misunderstoodbecause of inadequateattentionto the structuring role
of prostitution'slegal status.
Althoughtheseorganizingthemesare more explicitlytheorizedlater
in this articleand juxtaposed with predominantnarrativesthroughout
thissection,a littlefurther elaborationis in order.Even thoughmaking
recommendationsabout the properlegal responsesto prostitutionhas
been a major aim of much feministwork on prostitution, thereremains
a curioustendencyto see sex workas a practicewhose politicallyrelevant
featuresexist independentof its currentlegal status. In contrast,a
significant portionof the analysisof sex work generatedby prostitutes'
rightsgroupshas focusedon thewaythatpatternsof legal regulationand
enforcement operateto create the veryphenomenonof prostitutionto
whichfeminists have endeavoredto generatelegal responses.10 Although
the detailsvarysomewhatthroughoutthe NorthAmericanand western
European statesthatare mycentralfocus,sex workis thoroughly crimi-
nalized throughouttheseareas. Even when theactual act of prostitution
is legal,a broad net of relatedoffenses-solicitingor procuringa prosti-
tuteor client,livingoffthewages of a prostitute, maintaininga "bawdy
house," and many more-may be illegal (Scibelli 1987; McClintock
1992). Moreover,police use broad laws against"nightwalking"or "con-
duct likelyto debauch" to regulateprostitution(Scibelli 1987; Kandel
1992). Evenin suchplaces as Nevada and partsof Germany, whereprosti-
tutionis legalizedand restricted to licensedbrothelsor particularneigh-
borhoods(Scibelli1987; McClintock1992), prostitutes continueto work
9 Bell
1987; Delacoste and Alexander1987; Pheterson1989. In additionto thesepub-
lishedanthologiesof writingsby sex workers,therehas been a recentsurgein academic
writingabout prostitutes'organizationsand theirpolitics(see McClintock 1992; Jenness
1993; Bell 1994; and Fechner1994).
10In fact,one of themajor differencesamong prostitutes'organizationsis the extent
to whichtheysee themostobjectionableaspectsof prostitution, especiallythevulnerabil-
ityof prostitutes to violentabuse by pimpsand clients,as beingby-productsof criminali-
zation or as inherentin deeperpatternsof sexual violencethatproducea demandforpros-
titutionitself,althoughall tendto agreethatlaws and enforcement patternsthatpunish
prostitutes themselves(ratherthanclientsor pimps)exacerbatetheharmsof prostitution
(Fechner1994).

in illegal streetprostitutionbecause of the exploitative,degrading,and

dangerousconditionsof the brothels(Scibelli 1987). Conversely, else-
where in the United States,police enforcement of prostitutionlaws is
highlyselective,usuallyfocusingheavilyon streetprostitution and leaving
higher-status massage parlors and escort services unhindered.
relatively
Because of selectiveenforcement of prostitutionlaws,use bythepolice of
more generallaws to harass prostitutes,and the coexistenceof crimi-
nalized streetprostitution withlegalizedbrothelsand red-light districts,
thereis considerablymore convergencein the actual relationshipsbe-
tween sex workersand the police across North Americanand western
European statesthanmaybe evidentfromthelegal codes (Scibelli1987;
McClintock1992).11
These formsof stateregulationarticulateprostitution withina cultural
realm of marginalizedsexualityand isolate it fromthe statusof work.
Prohibitionson livingoffthe earningsof a prostitute or cohabitingwith
one preventsex workersfromactingas primarywage earnersfortheir
families(McClintock1992). Conversely, emphasison prostitutes' sexual
acts is reflectedin regulatoryfocuson sexuallytransmitted diseases,the
frequentinsistenceby judges that prostitutescannot be raped, and re-
movalof sex workers'childrenon thebasis ofparentalsexual misconduct
(McClintock1992, 89). Legal regimes, then,playan important roleinsup-
pressingsex workers'attemptsto articulatetheirpracticesas a formof
work and promoteits interpretation as fundamentally a sexual act. As I
will discuss later in this article,manyprostitutesattemptto resistthis
construction byarticulatingtheirpracticeas a formof serviceworkstruc-
turedas a sex act, a performance in whichtheclient'sexperienceof par-
ticipation in a sexual act is an illusion createdby the sex worker,the
sex actress.12
'1 Not coincidentally,thenationsunderconsiderationalso shareroughlysimilarindus-
trialeconomies,social welfareprograms,liberaldemocracies,and culturalheritages.The
relationshipbetweensex workand thestate,therestof theeconomy,and culturallyspe-
cificunderstandings of work,money,and sexualitymaybe considerablydifferent in other
partsof theworldand mightrequiredifferent theoreticaltools to understandsex work
and to suggestappropriateresponses.For instance,in Thailand,sex workreliesheavilyon
the intersections of ruralagrarianpovertyand state-supported internationalsex tourism
(Scibelli1987; McClintock1992) and mayoperatein thecontextof different understand-
ingsof the relationbetweenamorousand commercialsex thanin Euro-American societies
(Shrage1992, 49).
12 In her
fascinatingbook Reading,Writing, and RewritingtheProstituteBody (1994)
ShannonBell devotesa chapterto feminist performance artproducedby sex workers(in-
cludingwomeninvolvedin aspectsof sex workotherthanprostitution, such as printpor-
nographyand liveperformance). Althoughbeyondthe bounds of thisarticle,it would be
worthwhileto investigate what,ifany,connectionsexistbetweenprostitutes' characteriza-
tionsof theirworkas beingstructured by performance and theself-conscious and explicit
productionof performance artas a mode of theorizingsex workers'lives,as well
as the moreexplicitlyperformance-oriented sex worksuch as livesex showsand photo-
graphicpornography.

Whileitis importantto maintaina criticalperspective on claimsabout

prostitution made by sex workers, as with anyone,especiallyin lightof
theirheterogeneity, theseclaimsnonethelessmeritsome special attention,
bothepistemically and politically.Most simply,sex workers'own under-
standings of theirlives,and theways of livingembeddedin those forms
of understanding, are themselvespartof the phenomenonunderinvesti-
a
gation. Although political and ethicalevaluationof prostitutionwill
undoubtedlyinclude an analysisof how the practiceaffectseven those
who have no directinteractionwithit, how sex workersthemselvesex-
perienceand are affectedby sex work has been of crucialimportanceto
feministconsiderationsof the subject.While it may be appropriateto
speak of harmsto oneselfthatone eitherfailsto realizeor failsto under-
stand,one's actual experienceof a practicesurelyplaysan importantrole
in any evaluationof it. Thus, whetherparticipantsin sex work actually
feel humiliated,liberated,degraded, sexy, objectified,or indifferent
should play a role both in descriptionsof what sex work is like and in
any attemptsto evaluateit.
Althoughtheseconsiderationsalone would justifya concertedatten-
tion to thetestimony of sex workers,I thinkthe reasonsgo a bit deeper.
Most simply,sex workers'understandings of theirworkare developedin
conjunctionwiththeiractual experienceof the practiceunderanalysis.
To theextentthattheseunderstandings arisefrom,are embeddedin, and
serveto guidesex workers'participationin prostitution, sex workershave
a great deal at stake in, and greatdeal of exposureto, how well their
ideas workin practice(Mohanty1993). Not onlydoes thispersonalstake
in sex workplay a relevantepistemicrole,but,to theextentone is com-
mittedto democratizingboth social and intellectuallife,those most
affectedby a practiceshould have a say in the inseparableprojectsof
describingand evaluatingit.13
The least complicatedapproach to prostitutionis the freecontract
(contractarian)(Ericsson1980; Jaggar1991). This narrativesees prosti-
tutionas an unremarkablepaymentof a fee for the performanceof a
service.As long as entranceintothecontractis freelychosen,ratherthan
coerced,the stateshould not interfere withit. Anyobjectionsto the ex-
change are considered to be outdated, "moral" objectionsthat,whilein-
dividualsmaybe entitledto havethem,oughtnotto interfere withothers'
13
This articleis onlya verypartialand highlyinadequatepartof such a project.The
epistemicand politicalrole forsex workersbeingdiscussedwould be farbetterachieved
by facilitatingdirectparticipationin feministintellectualand politicalwork.Indeed,there
are considerabledangersof both misrepresentation and appropriationwhen one drawson
others'experiencesin thisfashion.I see thisarticlenot as an attemptto transmitsex work-
ers' insightsto an academic audiencebut as part of an attemptto includecriticalwork
producedoutsidetheacademyin myown, and in thewideracademiccommunity's, pur-
view of relevantsourceswithwhichto engagein criticalconversation.

libertyto contract.As longas theprostitution contractwas notconceived

in coercion and does not affectanyoneoutside it, then it is a private
act withwhichthe public statehas no businessto interfere. Prostitutes'
rightsgroups often to
respond perceiveddisapproval from feministsand
generaldenigration from sexual conservatives byappeal to contractarian
notionsof choice and privacy:"Whateveryou or I thinkof prostitution,
womenhavetherightto make up theirown mindsabout whetheror not
to work as prostitutes, and underwhat terms"(Delacoste and Alexan-
der 1987, 211).
Theoristsemploynotionsof autonomyto criticizeand broadenthe
contractarian's notionof consent,in particularchallengingwhethercoer-
cion shouldbe understoodonlyin termsofimminent physicalharm.Con-
tracttheoryis based on a certainnormativevision of human beingsas
mastersof theirown destiny,and not all actual contractsbear out this
vision (Radin 1987; Anderson1990). Liberalapproachesof thissortat-
tend to the contextin which actual choices occur,distinguishing them
fromidealized choices underconditionsof equality.Liberalshave diffi-
cultiesfiguring out what to say about someonewho "chooses" to act in
a waycontraryto "autonomous"choiceifthatpersondeniesthatshe or
he is makingthatchoicebecauseofconditionsofinequality. To determine
what typesof actionsare contraryto humanautonomy,liberaltheories
generallyrelyon a normativenotion of "human flourishing" or "basic
goods" (Rawls 1971; Radin 1987). Liberalsmay regardprostitution as
inherently degradingbecausenoncommercialized sexualityis partoftheir
vision of humanflourishing (Radin 1987; Bell 1994, 78), thusimplying
thatanyparticipationin prostitution is evidenceeitherof coercion(usu-
ally economic or
desperation) immorality. Liberalsmay also claim that
is
prostitution morallysuspect because any transactionthat identifies
humanworthwiththe body is degrading.In orderto preventthisanaly-
sis fromdisqualifyingless controversialpracticeslike wage labor and
professionalathletics,theyappeal to a notionof "labor power" or "pro-
fessionalskill" that an individualpossesses and may tradeas if it were
a discreteobject withoutinvolvinga sale of the self (Pateman 1988;
McClintock1992).
Liberal approaches rightlypay attentionto the broadercontextin
whichchoicesare made.Not onlymaycertainactualchoicesconflict with
the notionof autonomy,but giventheotherchoicesavailable,an option
thatis harmfulto autonomymaystillbe betterthanthealternatives, for
instance,starvation.Thus, liberalswill oftenintroducea distinctionbe-
tweenwhat would be permittedin an ideal world and what should be
permitted giventheimperfections of thisone (Radin 1987; Shrage1989,
1994). This line of thoughttakesa feminist turnwithregardto prostitu-
tionbyemphasizingtheprevalenceofemployment discrimination against

women,theburdensofsexual harassmenton thejob, and thesegregation

of women into low-payingand unsatisfying jobs as unjust featuresof
otheravailable employmentthat make prostitution a reasonablechoice
for women, even thoughit may be inherently degrading(Radin 1987;
Shrage1989, 1994).
At least the firstpart of this argumentresonatesverystronglywith
someprostitutes' defenseoftheirchoiceofprofession:"The averagepros-
titutein thiscountry[theUnitedStates]can grossfromabout one hun-
dredto two hundreddollarsa day,or more,witha greatdeal of flexibility
about hoursand daysofwork.Programsthattryto helpprostitutes make
a transitioninto low-paid,boringjobs tend to fail" (Alexander1987b,
206). Many feminists have arguedthatthe relativeinhospitabilityof the
labor marketto womenis due in largepartto waysin whichtherelation-
ship betweenwork and familylifeare structured(Williams1991). Not
only are workplacesgeographicallyisolated fromresidentialareas, in-
compatiblewithroutineelderand childcare,not to mentionpregnancy,
and otherwisetailoredto an idealizedmale workerwitha wifewho cares
for home and family(Pateman 1988; Williams 1991), but the cultural
distinctionbetweenproductiveworkand familialcare,as well as between
high-and low-statuswork,is also profoundly gendered(Ferguson1989;
Williams 1991). By gettingpaid for what Ann Fergusoncalls "sex/af-
fectivelabor" underflexibleworkingconditions(themoreso ifcriminali-
zationwereended),sex workmaynotsimplybe a reasonablechoicegiven
the optionsbut mayactuallychallengesome of the structural conditions
thatso narrowwomen'soptionsin thefirstplace. Conversely, bydenying
prostitutionthe statusof legitimatework, criminalizationhelps patrol
the boundarybetweenthe sex/affective labor routinelyassignedto and
expected of women and practicesdeservingof the financialand status
rewardsof "work."
As Carole Pateman(1988) argues in persuasivedetail,liberalismhas
greatdifficulty maintaininga balancingact betweentwo verydifferent
outcomes:contractarianism and Marxism.Only considerabletheoretical
contortionsexplain whystandardcontracttheorydoes not permitslave
contracts.Those contortions,however,tend to propel liberalstoward
seeingall real contractsas takingplace betweenunequals and therefore
as illegitimate.Marxist approachesto prostitution play on the slippage
betweenthe institutionof prostitutionand the more generalsense of
"prostitute," givenin theRandom House Dictionaryof theEnglishLan-
guage (2d ed.) as "a personwho willinglyuses his or hertalentor ability
in a base and unworthy way,usuallyformoney."The keyterms,ofcourse,
are "base" and "unworthy." Undera Marxistinterpretation, everysale of
servicesis entranceinto a relationof subordinationthattransforms the
workerinto a commodifiedobject and is thus unworthyof freehuman

beings.Hence, Marx wrote: "Prostitution is only a specificexpression

of the generalprostitution of the laborer" (1964, 133n.). The wrongof
prostitution is simplyassimilatedto thewrongof wage laborundercapi-
talismin general.The generalquestionthenbecomeswhetheror notthere
is anythingdifferent about prostitution because it involvessex (Overall
1992), a difference that might lead feminists to be morecriticalof prosti-
tutionthan otherwage work involvingwomen and mightexplain why
prostitutionhas in fact been differentiated fromotherformsof wage
workbythedominantculturaland legalpracticesofEuro-American capi-
talistnations.
The contribution of radicalfeminists has beento emphasizethatpros-
titutioninvolvessex and as such is linkedas muchto theorganizationof
genderand sexualityas it is to the organizationof wage labor.14In a
sense,the radical feministpositionmirrorsthe Marxist one. Insteadof
identifying how workers'subordinationallows theirlabor to be appro-
priated,radical feministsfocus on how women'ssubordinationallows
theirsexualityto be appropriated."Sexualityis to feminism what work
is to marxism:that which is most one's own, yet most taken away"
(MacKinnon 1989, 3). Radical feministanalysesassimilateprostitution
to marriageand the appropriationof femalesexualityby a man in ex-
change for some kind of economic stability(Dworkin 1987; Pateman
1988; Fechner1994). In particular, prostitutionreinforces dominantsex-
ual rolesin which men violentlyuse women's sexuality fortheir own plea-
sureand reproduction, and womenare constructed as sexual servantsfor
men (Shrage1989, 1994; Overall1992, 719).
For radical feministswho do not want to abolish or condemnwage
labor,differentiating sex fromotherformsofhumanactivity thatare pur-
chased fora fee is an importanttask. None do thisverywell, but those
who trytendto fallback upon thesame kindof normalizingdiscourseof
ideal humansexuality,and implicitly ofworkas well,foundin theliberal
accountsdiscussedabove-sex should be privateand intimate,not com-
modifiedand partof publiclife;it shouldtakeplace in conditionsof per-
fectequality,not powerdifferences, and should be orientedtowardmu-
tual pleasure (Finley1988). This normativevision is coupled with the
claim that male sexualityinherently divergesfromthisnormbecause it
is inseparablylinkedwith violenceand subordination(Dworkin 1987;
MacKinnon 1989).
14 Shrage1989,1992,1994;Overall1992;Fechner 1994.Note,however, theambigu-

itiesofthetermsex.Wehaveinherited a termthatcollapsesbiological of
understandings
sexdifference,
genderedsocialcategories, genitalacts,anderoticforms
particular ofexpe-
thewaysinwhichthesedifferent
andcriticizing
rience.Disentangling meanings havebeen
naturalizedandfusedhasbeenandshouldcontinue to be a majorpartofthefeminist
project.

Oftenthe argumentis simplya circularappeal to "sex." Pateman,for

instance,distinguishes the use of women'sbodies forsexualityfromthe
use of baseball players' bodies for theirathleticpotentialas follows:
"Owners of baseball teamshave commandoverthe use of theirplayers'
bodies, but the bodies are not directlyused sexuallyby those who have
contractedforthem"(1988, 206). ChristineOveralldifferentiates prosti-
tutionfromotherkindsof workin whichwomenhavetraditionally been
employed: "While cooking,nursing, and child care need not necessarily
be commoditized,sex workis by definition thecommoditizationof sex"
(1992, 717). The strainin reasoningshould be apparent,sinceone could
justas easilysay,"Whilesexuality, nursing,and cookingare notnecessar-
ily commoditized,hiredchild care is by definitionthe commoditization
of childcare."
As Anne McClintock and Laurie Shrage have both pointed out
(McClintock1992, 95; Shrage1994, 93), radicalfeminist distinctionsbe-
tweensex work and otherformsof labor tendto relyon two relatedand
problematicformsof essentialismabout sex. In identifying sex, moreso
than otherbodilymediatedactivities,with both the body and the self,
radicalfeminists tendto naturalizebothsexualityitselfand the relation-
ship betweensexual acts and identity. In doing so, theytendto take for
grantedtheculturally and historicallyspecificprocessesthatsortpractices
into categorieslike "work," "recreation,""relationbuilding,"and so on
(Shrage 1994, 93). While Shrageemphasizeshow theseproblemslimit
the extentto whichOverall'sanalysismayapplyoutsideNorthAmerica
and westernEurope,thesame essentialistmomentsalso createproblems
evenifthecharacterizations happento fitdominantculturalunderstand-
ings within a particular context.When those dominantunderstandings
are themselvespartof oppressivesystemsof meaningand practice,it may
be a graveerrorto hold themas givensand thenevaluatea practicein that
light.By doingso, thecriticmayinadvertently overlookbothmomentsin
which effortsare being made to resist,transform, or transgressthose
normsand practicesthatprovidethebasis forsuchefforts, insteadfocus-
ing attention on the of
dangers transgression rather than on creating
spaces in which it is less dangerous.
In justthisway,radicalfeminist approachestendto underestimate how
much of what theyidentifyas harmfulin prostitution is a product,not
of the inherentcharacterof sex work or sexualityitselfin any society
roughlylikethisone, butratherof thespecificregimesof criminalization
and denigrationthatserveto marginalizeand oppresssex workerswhile
constrainingand distortingsex work's radical potential.While radical
feminists generallysupportdecriminalization of prostitutes'own actions,
they nonethelesstend to support criminalizationof activitiesassoci-
ated withprostitution, includingthose of johns and pimps,and support

characterizations ofcommercialsex as inherently degradingto prostitutes

(Fechner1994). Thus, while theyhope to shiftthe burdensofcriminaliza-
tionfromwomensex workersto male clientsand pimps,theydo so with
an eye towardthe eliminationof sex work altogether.For radicalfemi-
nists,the law and itsenforcement are largelyirrelevant to understanding
and/oraffecting prostitution,sincelegalregimessimply reflect underlying
structures of sexualizedinequality:"Because thestigmaof prostitution is
the stigmaof sexualityis the stigmaof the femalegender,prostitution
maybe legal or illegal,butso longas womenare unequal to menand that
inequalityis sexualized,women will be boughtand sold as prostitutes,
and thelaw will do nothingabout it" (MacKinnon 1989, 168).
In analyzingsex workas an inherently oppressivepracticethatis part
and parcelof patriarchalcapitalism,theradicalfeminist approachfailsto
offeran adequate explanationforwhysex workis thesubjectof repres-
sive and marginalizinglegal regulationand why its open practiceis
so widelyabhorred.These feminists claim that "our society'stolerance
forcommerciallyavailable sex, legal or not, impliesgeneralacceptance
of principleswhich perpetuatewomen'ssocial subordination"(Shrage
1989, 356; emphasisadded). Certainlythereare myriadways in which
sex workis eithertoleratedor promoted,but ifsex workis such a seam-
less fitwithorganizingprinciplesof Euro-American society,thequestion
should not be whyis it toleratedat all but whyis it toleratedonlyas a
marginal,degradedactivitywithoutofficiallegitimacy. Undertheradical
feminist interpretation, is
prostitution hardly different from marriageand
a
is partof generalsystemby which men gain sexual access to and domi-
nance overwomen. But if thisis the case, thenwhyis prostitution and
all its trappingsnot a culturallyexalted,legallysanctioned,flourishing
industryof the patriarchy? Moreover,whyis it thatsexual conservatives
who explicitlyadvocatewomen'ssexual and reproductive subordination
to men are among the most outspokencriticsof prostitution? One can
or
certainlyrespondbyobservingthat,legal not,prostitution veryprev- is
alent,but one stillowes an explanationof whyit is neitheractivelypro-
motednor indifferently acceptedor,betteryet,an explanationof how it
is thatillegalityitselfis partof how and whyprostitution is toleratedor
promoted.15 Prostitutes'own emphasis on the role that illegality and po-
lice suppressionplayin shapingthestructure of prostitution can beginto
15AndreaDworkin,unlikeradicalfeminists who treatthelaw as largelyirrelevant,
does offersome possibleexplanationsforprostitution's includingrestraint
criminalization,
of men'sragingself-destructivesexuality("Male dominancedoes best,afterall, whenmen
do not,generallyspeaking,fuckthemselvesto deathby fuckingwhatevermoves" [1987,
158]), coordinationof male sexual access to women(161), and male sexual pleasurein
lawbreakingitself.Regardlessof whethersuch positionsare accuratein theexplanatory
role theygiveto male sexuality,theydo not seemto explainhow it is thatlegal regulation
tendsto focuson theactivitiesof prostitutes,not theirclients.

providesome answers.It is not sex workper se thatpromotesoppressive

values of capitalistpatriarchy but rathertheparticularculturaland legal
production of a marginalized,degradedprostitution thatensuresits op-
pressive characteristicswhile acting to limitthe subversivepotentialthat
might attenda decriminalized, culturallylegitimized form of sex work.
Finally,the radical position contradicts the of
testimony manyprosti-
tutesthattheyfindsex workto be empoweringor at least no worsethan
an ordinaryjob. Indeed,manyprostitutes emphasizethattheyengagein
sex work not simplyout of economicneed but out of satisfactionwith
the controlit givesthemovertheirsexual interactions, just the opposite
of what theradicalsargue.Nina Lopez-Jonesof theEnglishCollectiveof
Prostitutesstates, "The sex industryis not the only industrywhich is
male-dominatedand degradeswomen, but it is the industrywherethe
workersare illegaland can leastdefendpubliclyour rightto our jobs. We
arguedthatforsome womento getpaid forwhatall womenare expected
to do forfreeis a sourceof powerforall womento refuseany freesex"
(Delacoste and Alexander 1987, 273). To a degree,many sex workers
echo the radicalsentiment thatwomenare generallyexpectedto caterto
men'ssexual desires,but insteadof seeingprostitution as an extensionof
that tendency,theysee it as a reversal.Similarly, while recognizingand
condemningtheviolenceto whichmanyprostitutes are exposed,theyat-
tributethis vulnerability not to the inherentqualities of male sexuality
but to powerimbalancesthatcriminalization eithercreatesor reinforces.
In thisdisagreement, one can see quiteclearlytheproductiveroleofcrimi-
nalizationand restrictive formsof legalizedsex workin shapingthe bal-
ance of powerbetweensex workers,clients,and pimps.One of themost
frequentreasonssex workerscite fordemandingdecriminalization, and
one of the most frequentcomplaintsagainst legalized brothelsystems
such as the ones in Nevada and Frankfurt (Scibelli1987), is thatbothof
thesesystemspreventsex workersfromexercisingcontroloverwho their
clientsare and what acts theyperform(Scibelli1987, 148; Kandel 1992,
82; McClintock1992, 86, 88-99), leavingthemwithoutrecourseto legal
protectionfromfraud,abuse, and rape.
Wheretheproblemof theMarxistcriticstendsto be theirinabilityto
see prostitutionas about sex as well as work, radical feministsall too
oftenfail to rememberthat, especiallyfor the prostitutesthemselves,
prostitutionis about work at least as much as it is about sex. Instead,
theyclaimthatthemonetaryelementis simplyirrelevant to prostitution's
inherentstatusas sexual violencein which women are completelypas-
sivevictims,likechildren:"The factthata john givesmoneyto a woman
or a child forsubmitting to theseacts does not alter the factthathe is
committingchild sexual abuse, rape and battery;it merelyredefines
thosecrimesas prostitution"(quoted in Fechner1994, 49). In describing

prostitutionas the violentappropriationof women'ssexuality,radical

feministsassume thatprostitutes experienceprostitution as theirclients
imagine them as
to-namely, submitting to their sexual desires and join-
ing them in a sexual act,thus as
constituting prostitute sexuallysubor-
the
dinate(Shrage1994, 134).
Prostitutes' own testimony thattheiractivitiesmaybe justanotherjob
suggests, however, that theymay not be providingthe same thingthat
the clientis receiving.Take, for instance,the followingcomparisonof
prostitution to otherbodilyactivities:"I thinkwomenand menand femi-
nistshaveto realizethatall workinvolvessellingsome partof yourbody.
You mightsell yourbrain,you mightsell yourback, you mightsell your
fingers fortypewriting. Whateveritis thatyoudo you are sellingone part
of yourbody.I choose to sell mybodytheway I wantto and I choose to
sell myvagina" (Pheterson1989, 146). Of course,herclientquite likely
does thinkofhervaginaas verydifferent thanherback or fingers because
it is a locus of his eroticdesire.In thecontextof sex work,or indeedin
any givencontext,it need not have the same significancefor her,de-
pendingon how hersexualityhas beenconstructed in relationto herindi-
vidual historyand culturalcontext.Such a historyand contextmight
includea sex workers'community thathas developedand cultivatedpar-
ticularformsof erotic,and nonerotic,experiencein conflictwithprevail-
ingnorms.16 Dworkin,in contrast,dramatically reducesprostitution, and
to
prostitutes, a reflection of male sexual desire,leaving no room forpros-
titutesthemselvesto have anyagencyat all: "In themale system,women
are sex; sex is the whore.... Usingher is usingpornography.... Being
heris beingpornography"(1989, 202).
The last of the major approachesto prostitution has aimed to recog-
nize and legitimatethesesortsof processesof construction withinmar-
ginalizedcommunities, as well as to expose how dominant forms of sex-
ual experienceare equally historicallyand culturallycontingent.17 Sex
radicals are criticalof restrictions placed on sexual in
activity general.
Althoughtheysharewithcontractarians a tendencyto takeexplicitcon-
sentat face value (Rubin 1984), theyhave a different view of sexuality
itself.Instead of takingsexualityto be an ahistoricalnaturalurge,sex
radicalsemphasizethewaythatsexualityis historically constructed.18By
doing so, theytendto leave behindelementsof theliberalpublic/private
16 forthesex workerneed not implythatthecli-
Of course,such lack of significance
ent'sunderstanding haveemphasizedthe
has no politicalimportance.Radical feminists
way thatinstitutions thatmayencouragemento view womenas objectsforsexual use
maycontributeto violence,harassment,and denigrationdirectedtowardwomen.My
hope is to constructa theoryof prostitutionthatcould retainthisinsightwithouteras-
ing thepossibilitiesforresistancewithintheprostitute'sunderstanding of thesituation.
17
Foucault 1978; Rubin 1984; Weeks 1985; Bell 1994.
Shrage1989, 1992, 1994; Davis 1990.
18

distinctionby construingindividualeroticdesire as profoundlysocial.

Waryof the historicaluses of sexualityand sexual identityas an axis of
power,theytend to play down the importanceof sexuality,suggesting
thatit should no longerbe a special case amonghumanactivityand that
the same kindof diversity oughtto be toleratedin sexual habitsthatare,
forinstance,in culinaryones (Rubin 1984).
Althoughsex radicalismis sympathetic to theprostitutes' rightsmove-
ment, this sympathy takes the form of acceptingprostitution as yetan-
otherconfiguration of sexual desireand pleasure.Jeffrey Weeks,forin-
stance,lumpsprostitutes withothereroticdissidentswho haveorganized,
saying,"Transvestites,transsexuals,paedophiles,sado-masochists, fetish-
and others-each group markedby specific
ists, bisexuals,prostitutes,
sexual tastes,or aptitudes,subdividedand demarcatedofteninto speci-
fic styles,morals and communities,each with specifichistoriesof self-
expression-have all appeared on the world'sstage to claim theirspace
and 'rights"' (1985, 187). Similarly,Gayle Rubin treatsmoneyas just
anothervariablewithregardto sex, no different than age, gender,mar-
riage, monogamy,species, race, or violence, as do some sex workers
themselves(Bell 1994, 106). This characterizationof prostitutionlinks
up withprostitutes' historicalconnectionto oppressedsexual minorities,
with complaintsthat prostitutionis treateddifferently than otherjobs
onlybecause of thesex, and drawson liberaldefensesof intimatebehav-
ior againststateintrusion.However,treatingmonetaryexchangeas just
anothersexual variationmay underestimate the social role of "private"
sexualityand ignoresprostitutes' emphasison theirpracticeas workwith
an ambiguousrelationto desire.Moreover,it obscuresthe factthatthe
vast majorityof prostitutes entertheirprofessionsimplyto earn money,
not because sex formoneyturnsthemon.
What is the object of the exchange?

Or, how to mix sex and money
It is easy to see whytheprostitutes'rightsmovementwould have such
strongconnectionsto othersexual liberationmovements.The same his-
toricalperiod thatsaw an explosionof attentionto sexual variationand
itscontrolalso saw increasedregulationofprostitution (Walkowitz1980;
Bell 1994). Prostitution has historicallybeen viewedbysexual conserva-
tives as a manifestationof sexual deviance and impurity.The epithet
"whore" carriesas manyconnotationsof femalesexual impropriety (in
particular,havingtoo manypartners)as itdoes ofcommercialsex. Prosti-
tutes,like sexual minorities, have engagedin sexual activityoutsidethe
legitimatedboundaries of married,heterosexualmonogamy.Certainly
thecase forinclusionseemsstrongindeed.

And yetwhat is to be made of prostitution as sex work? How are

to
prostitutesgoing get their demands for collective bargaining,health
care, health and safetystandards, minimum wages, and protectionfrom
fraud,extortion, and abuse met iftheirpractices are framed as theexpres-
sion of sexual desireratherthan as productivelabor withinthe service
sector?Moreover,how is one to understandthe radicalseparationthat
manyprostitutesmake betweentheirsex work and theirsex life?Take,
forinstance,themanylesbianswho engagein sex workwithmale clients
(Nestle 1987). What does theirworkhaveto do withtheirsexual desire
(Bell 1994, 110)? These questionsof how to understandprostitution in
termsof itssimilarities and differences, in termsofitscrucialdistinguish-
ing feature,are part of a political process of articulation(Laclau and
Mouffe 1985). While the success of a particulararticulation-forex-
ample,articulating prostitution as fundamentally equivalentto otherper-
secutedsexualities(as sex radicalsdo), as equivalentto sexual violence
againstwomen(as radicalfeminists do), as equivalentto servicework(as
manyprostitutes'rightsorganizationsdo)-is limitedby objectivefea-
turesofthepracticeat hand,itis underdetermined bythesefeatures.How
prostitution is articulated,then,is notsimplya processof descriptionbut
a productiveprocessthathelpsshape theculturallandscapeand involves
inescapablypoliticalquestionsabout how,forinstance,to organizesexu-
ality,labor,and commerce.In articulating prostitution,then,an engaged
criticmustattendboth to detailsof the practice itselfand to how discur-
sivechoices will play a role both in shaping that practiceand in shaping
otherpracticeswithwhichprostitution is articulated(e.g., ifprostitution
is a formof work,thenone mightarguethatthe social organizationof
Otherformsoflabor oughtto becomemorelikeprostitution or viceversa
[Shrage1994, 161]).
Partof thedifficulty is that,in hegemonicEuro-American culture,sex-
uality and money are thought of as things that do
cannot, not, and/or
should not mix. This separationis relatedat least in partto the attribu-
tion of money,commerce,and contractto thepublic realmof workand
intimacy, desire,and pleasureto the privaterealmof familialand other
affective relationships(Olsen 1983; Ferguson1989; Barretand McIntosh
1991). We Euro-Americans havesayingssuchas "Don't mix businessand
pleasure" and "Money can't buyyou love."As manytraditionalformsof
communallifehave eroded and householdshave shrunk,intimacyand
community-as opposed to the supposed cold self-interestedness of the
market-have becomemoreand moreidentified withsexuality.As Jeffrey
Weeks has written,"Sex has become the cement that binds people
together"(1985, 29) against the proliferating, differentiating forcesof
capitalism.This descriptionis part myth and partreality, but at least in

commonsense termsloveis a paradigmatically noneconomic matter and

thecommercial worldof workis notaboutparticularistic desire.Even
thoughcommitments to thisviewmayactuallystructure manypeople's
of
experiences work,money, desire,and sexuality, it is crucialto keep
sightof theideologicalaspectsof theviewthatobscurebothwaysin
whichthemarketand theworkplaceare structured bydesires(Bataille
1985) and the"private"affective that
relationships organizeproductive
andreproductive laborcrucialtothefunctioning ofthemarket (Ferguson
1989;Barret andMcIntosh1991;Williams1991).Thisobfuscation priv-
ilegesgroupswhoseparticular preferences becomeuniversalized as "in-
strumental" rationality andplacesburdens on groups, especially women,
whoselaborgoesunrecognized or undervalued becauseit is castas the
purely private expression oflove.
Prostitution challenges thepossibility ofidentifying an actionas sim-
plyeither a market transaction ortherealization ofprivate desire.On the
basisofclashesbetween differentdescriptionsoftheprostitution encoun-
ter,I wouldlikeprovisionally to proposethatit be imagined as a bifur-
catedevent, meaning different
things to eachparticipant, although I later
suggest inadequacies withsuchan account.Consider, forinstance, Carole
Pateman's statement, "Prostitution is theuseofa woman'sbodybya man
forhisownsatisfaction" (1988, 198). Thisfigures prostitution as about
a man'spleasure.Whatof thefollowing redescription: "Prostitution is
abouttheuse of a man'sdesirebya womanforherown profit"? The
juxtaposition suggests a contradiction,atleastiftheexploitative connota-
tionof "use" is takento be bothhierarchical and fundamental to what
prostitution is.
"really" Presumably the man and the woman cannot each
be usingtheother.One narrative emphasizes the man's satisfaction and
thewoman'sstaticbody,ignoring themonetary exchange. The woman's
bodyis usedbytheman.Theotheremphasizes
(objectified) themonetary
exchange and theman's static
desire,ignoring the sexual qualitiesofthe
act.Theman's(objectified) desireis usedbythewoman.
The questionto ask now is, Is thereanyreasonto thinkthatthere
shouldbe a single, privilegeddescription oftheevent? Thesignificance of
theeventdependson whatis considered important-thus, contractarians
and liberalstryto puzzleoverissuesof choiceand freedom, Marxists
troublethemselves withlaborandcommodities, radicalfeminists empha-
sizesexualviolenceand subordination, and sexradicalsemphasize con-
sentand historicity. Anyattempt to imposea singledescription of the
eventas whatreallyis happening makesa crucialand falseassumption:
thetwo partiesexperience thesameevent,an eventwhosemeaningis
fixedindependent ofthecontextin whicheach participant experiences
it or by a contextthatis identicalforeach participant (Scott1992;

Mohanty1993).19That theman and woman in our imaginaryencounter

both agree to and partakein certainactions in no way guaranteesthat
those actions have the same significance for both parties.An adequate
account must allow for the possibilitiesof miscommunication, perfor-
mance,and thedivergent significance of singlesignifying acts.
In fact,some prostitutes haveclaimedthatit is preciselyin thedisjunc-
tion betweenthe meaningsthat sex work occurs: "Of course we faked
it.... The ethicwas: ... You alwaysfakeit. You're puttingsomething
overon him and he is payingforsomethinghe reallydidn'tget" (Turkel
1974, 94). What is crucial here is that what he "really"got is, to the
extentthatitmatters,a questionoffantasy, ofthenarrative thatorganizes
the perceptionof the individual"experiencing"the event.It is entirely
possiblethatthe prostitute reallydid not giveit but theclientreallydid
get it because it dependson theinterpretive resourceseach personbrings
to theevent.This is particularly possiblein situationsin whichthevarious
participantsdo not tryto come to agreementabout whathas transpired.
Indeed,thereis no reasonforthemto. If theprostitute can experienceit
as a banal physicalexerciseand the clientcan experienceit as having
sexual attentionlavishedon him,theneach maybe betteroffthanifthey
had to negotiatewhether,forinstance,he had just boughthersexual ex-
pressionor she had just manipulatedhis erogenouszones forfastcash.
Sincetheeroticsignificance of sexual actsalwaysdependson specificcon-
text,individualdesires, and unarticulatedassumptionsabout the act's
significance for others (e.g., whether it expressesaffectionor indiffer-
ence), thereis considerable room for radicallydifferent experiencesof a
"single" act.
I thinkthisexplanationofthedivergence ofdescriptions ofwhatreally
in
happens prostitution-especially with regard to the tangledquestions
of consent,choice, and who is "really" in control-is more successful
than attemptingto produce the definitive analysisof the "real" power
19One maymisunderstand thetruesignifi-
might objectthatoneorbothparticipants
canceand,to theextent thepracticeis "really"oppressive andcontrary totheirinterests,
mayfailto recognize theirownoppression becauseoffalseconsciousness. As I havedis-
cussedabove,myargument dependsonlyon theactualdivergence ofparticipants'experi-
ences,regardlessofwhether underidealizedcircumstances thatdivergencemight disap-
pear.Moreover, I havesuggested above,andelaborate below,reasonsforbelieving that
sucha divergence might inprinciple
be irreducible as longas oneallowsfordifferences be-
tweenparticipants inpersonalhistory, eroticformations,andmicrocultural commitments.
Not onlyarethereplausiblealternatives to a false-consciousness
approach, butattribu-
tionsoffalseconsciousness carrytremendous drawbacks. Forstarters,theyareradically
undemocratic,setting up a privileged
group(usually intellectuals) theexperi-
to interpret
encesofothersforthem.Moreover, falseconsciousness starts
is deeplyessentialist-it
from fixedsocialcategories gender
(usually orclasscategories)andattempts toreadoff
andinterests,
identities failingto notehowthecategories areinternallyheterogeneous,
contingent,
historically andshifting.LaclauandMouffe1985andLaclau1990bareex-
tendedcritiquesofessentialistpoliticsandtheimplications offalseconsciousness.

relationsbetweenthe participants.This is not to say thattherewill not

be situationsin whichthe clash betweenthe two parties'understanding
of and actionswithinthe situationwill not producea conflict(e.g., she
refusesto do something,he wantsherto do it more"authentically")and
thatin thesesituationsit will matterwho is stronger, who is armed,who
has friendsnearby,who has thepolice on theirside,whose roleis socially
stigmatized,and so on. To say thatthe (culturallyshaped) desiresof dif-
ferentindividualsmayshape theirrealityneed not implythatthereis no
relevantcontextoutsideeithertheircontrolor awareness.
An importantlimitationof the view I sketchis that people do not
simplydecide what significance to givevariousacts; individualslearnto
understandthemselvesand theworldaroundthemthroughimmersionin
a set of meaningsand practicesoverwhichtheyhave varyingdegreesof
control,fromimperfect(e.g., a consciousness-raising group) to none at
all (e.g., one's parents,historicalmomentof birth).I could not simply
decide, on the spot,to redirectmydesireand reinvestit in different ob-
jects.However,cultureis not seamless,and hegemonyis nevercomplete
(Vance 1984; Laclau and Mouffe1985). Withoutdenyingthatheterosex-
ualityis highlynormalizedin theUnitedStatesand backedbytremendous
institutionalimperatives, one can stillacknowledgethe organizationof
communitiesof resistancewithinwhichthemeaningsof certainacts may
be radicallydifferent fromtheirsignificance in dominantdiscourseand
thatmayact to subvertthosedominantmeanings(Butler1990).
Similarly, even ifwomen are by and large taughtto understandtheir
sexuality in a givenway,theymay develop communitiesin which sex-
ualityis rearticulated throughcollectiveculturalwork.Prostitutes' rights
groupshave organizedtowardachievingpreciselythissortof rearticula-
tion (Jenness1993), muchas feminist consciousness-raisinggroupshave
acted to reorientparticipants'understandings of theirworld,theirlives,
and eventheiremotions(Scheman1980; Mohanty1993). Sinceprostitutes
are awareofthediscourseon femalesexualityfromwhichmostoftheircli-
entsemerge,theymaybe able to understandtheclient'sdesirewithoutit
havingthe same relationto theirown as the clientmay expect. Veena
Talwar Oldenburgmakes a similarargumentwithregardto courtesans
of Lucknow,India. These women livein theircommunityfullof rituals,
narratives,and practicesmeantto affirmwomen'ssexualityand contest
the image in which theyare cast by the masculinecultureoutsidetheir
community:"That male sexual control and aggressionis neutralized
in a settingwherethe heterosexualsex act is mereroutine,and passion
and pleasureare simulatedor distanced,is, perhaps,an essentialmechan-
ismthatwomen,bothwivesand prostitutes, haveuniversally used to pre-
servetheiremotionalintegrity and dignity"(1990, 283). Joan Nestle's
historicalwork and writingsby sex workerstestify to theimportanceof

community withothersex workersin "creatingpowerand autonomyfor

themselvesin seeminglypowerlesssocial interactions"(1987, 245). One
of the primaryeffectsof the criminalizationof prostitution, especially
when it prohibitssex workersfromlivingtogetheror communicating
about theirwork,is to interfere withtheformationof suchcommunities.
Nestle's attentionto the lesbian prostitute(who sells sex to men, in
thiscase) shouldhelp clarifytheincoherenceof automaticallyattributing
thedominantsocial meaningto a putatively sexual act. Accordingto Ali-
son Jaggar,"Whetherhousewifeor wage-earner, therefore, and whether
or not she allows genitalcontact,a woman mustsell her sexuality.And
since,unlikea man, she is definedlargelyin sexual terms,whenshe sells
hersexualityshe sellsherself"(1991, 274). On whatbasis reststheclaim
thata lesbianwoman who getsmoneyformasturbating a man is selling
"her sexuality"?Possiblyshe is sellinghis image of her sexuality-but
thisimagecertainlyis not herself.Granted,she mightalso experiencethe
transactionas an erasureof her sexuality,but to understandwhetheror
not this is so one cannot look simplyto hegemonicmeaningswithout
investigating thepossibilityof morelocalizedcommunities in whichoth-
ers are affirmed and produced(Vance 1984, 15), nor should one failto
considerwhichsocial and culturalconditionsare mostlikelyto promote
and sustainsuch alternatemeanings.
Indeed,thereis no reasonto assume thatifshe werestraightor ifthe
clientwere a woman, she would be sellingher sexuality-it would de-
pend rathercomplexlyon theparticularsoftheindividual'ssexualityand
on the contextof the act of prostitution. Giventheprevalenceof prosti-
tutes' insistence on seeingprostitution profession,and theirapparent
as a
comfortwithmaintainingsexual,desiringrelationships whennot on the
it
job, appears that the de-eroticization/defetishization of genitalsex acts
per se is what
precisely manyprostitutes learn to do on the job. Thereis
no more reason to thinkthat sex workerscannot separatetheirwork
fromtheirsex lifethan thereis to thinkthattherapistscannot separate
theirworkfromtheiremotionallife.
While the separationof sex acts and sexuality,and in particularthe
breakdownof theirreciprocalstructure, thatappears to go on in prosti-
tutionwreaks havoc with commonsensenotions that certainkinds of
behaviorare inherently sexual (and, implicitly,othersare inherently asex-
ual-hence theirsexualizationis describedas a displacementor a fetish
[Freud 1962]), I thinkthe subversivecontentof prostitution goes even
further. Up to this point my analysishas broughtsexualityand money
togetherin thesame event,althoughkeepingthemseparatebyerectinga
barrierbetweentheexperiencesoftheparticipants, characterizing theone
as in thesphereof sexualityand theother in the sphere of work. Even this
barrier,however,is permeable.Indeed, I would argue that it is constantly

transgressed,althoughthestrength of thesex/money oppositionmilitates

againstrecognizing it.
In contemporary capitalism,consumptionis eroticized,work sexual-
ized, and affecthitched to (re)production.Even if the sex workerdoes
not experienceprostitution as the exchangeof sexualityformoney,for
the clienteverypaycheckcan be translatedinto pleasure.Moreover,not
all prostitutes
drawa firmline betweentheireroticand workinglives:
I decidedto combinebusinessand pleasure.I was able to come a lot

at workand thereforetakebettercare ofmymotherand daughterat
home. (MistressLilithLash in Delacoste and Alexander1987, 51)
I foundit veryliberatingto be a prostitute,

and the men musthave
foundit liberatingtoo, fortheywere much betterloversthan my
husbands.Theyseemedto feelfreewithme and I withthem.(Phyllis
Luman Metal in Delacoste and Alexander1987, 119)
The experientialdiversityof sex workersis of paramountimportance:it

would not servethe interestsof bettertheory(and it would distortthe
livesof thosetheorized)to tryto declaresex workto be reallyabout the
divisionbetweensex and workor reallyabout transgressing thatbarrier.
What is mostimportant, perhaps,is preciselythetantalizing,threatening
possibilitythatone cannot know in advance,thatevenhighlyritualized
behaviorcontainswithinit theflexibilityforvariable,destabilizingexpe-
rienceand practice.
Criminalization and the production of modern prostitution

Having consideredsome new ways of thinkingabout prostitution, I
am now in a positionto offersomeideas about thequandaryof criminali-
zation mentionedabove. Prostitution currentlythrivesundera regimeof
police harassment and public condemnation (Scibelli 1987; McClintock
1992). If thecommercialsexual exchangeof prostitution wereinherently
part and of
parcel capitalism and/orpatriarchy,as both Marxists and
radical feministsclaim,thenwhyhas it been criminalizedor severelyre-
strictedand denigratedfor so long, decriedby those with preciselythe
conservativesexual values thatprostitution supposedlyupholds?
In a way,thisis a falseproblem.Foucaulthas arguedconvincingly that
the trappingsof Victorianpruderywerepartnot of a massivecampaign
of sexual repressionbut ratherof a massiveproductionand inventionof
sexualityand thedesiringsubject.In principle,then,thereis no necessary
contradictionbetweenlegal repressionand officialcondemnationon the
one hand and centrality to theworkingsof poweron theother.That said,

theparticularformstakenup byprostitution are deeplyinfluenced byits

legal and social sanction. One can ask which forms of organizationand
whathegemonicmeaningsofprostitution havebeenencouragedbycrimi-
nalization and public denigrationratherthan pretendthat the morally
and politicallyrelevantfeaturesof prostitution existindependentof such
conditions.Moreover,giventhewaysin whichprostitution challengesthe
very formations of one
sexuality, may wonder why its historicaldevelop-
menthas been linkedso closelyto themultiplication of sexualitiesdocu-
mentedby Foucault.The sex radicals'implicitansweris thatthe shared
historyis, commonsensically, theresultof commonstatusas instancesof
transgressive sexual diversity.I have argued,however,thatthisequation
is to misunderstand muchofprostitution. Indeed,perhapsitis thismisun-
derstandingthat is maintainedby the sexualizationand criminalization
of prostitution, a process that quarantinesprostitution fromthe legiti-
mateworldof businessand commerce,keepingthedomainsof sexuality
and economysymbolicallyseparatedand shapingeach in the process:
"The whore stigmareflectsdeeplyfeltanxietiesabout women trespass-
ing the dangerousboundariesbetweenprivateand public" (McClintock
1992, 73).
In Foucault'sterminology, prostitution challengesboththedeployment
of alliance (in its appropriationof sexual activityforatomized,anony-
mous pleasureand profitratherthanforprocreative, community-building
purposes) and the deploymentof sexuality(1978, 106): prostitution is
about notonlysex withoutreproduction but sex without desire,sex with-
out identity, indeed,sex withoutsexuality.Hintsofthiscan be seenin the
contemporary prostitutes'rightsmovement.Much of the movementhas
been modeled after the identitypoliticsof the gay liberationmovement,
including attemptto reclaimthewordwhoremodeledon thereclama-
an
tion of dyke.Whores,however,are stakingtheiridentitynot to theirde-
sirebutto theirwork-they call themselves"sex workers,"not "commer-
cialists" or some such identityterm,and do not suggestthat theirsex
workhas anydeep connectionwiththeireroticlife,althoughthetwo may
overlap.20As with Foucault'shomosexual,therehas been a movement
fromacts to identity, but fortheprostitute, sex becomesthetruthof the
subject not byorganizing her desirebut by organizing herlabor.
By outlawing prostitution, linking it to disease, placing it underthe
realmof sexual crimes,and attributing to prostitutes deviantsexual de-
sire,dominantinstitutions and discoursescut offthechallengeprostitu-
tion offersto the structures of sex-sexuality-desire-identity, thediscourse
of procreativesex, and the separationbetweenprivatesex and public
20
For a slightlydifferent rightsgroupsas claiminga si-
view,one thatsees prostitutes'
see Bell 1994.
multaneouslysexual and professionalidentity,

work,reformulating it as justanotherproblemforthevice squad. A brief

surveyof historicaldata and contemporary accountssupportsthisview.
Criminalization has strongly encouraged thedistinction betweenprostitu-
tion and "legitimate"businessand made it easy to distinguishprostitu-
tionfromotherformsof workon thebasis of its sexual nature.The stig-
matizationofsex workers'earningsand actionsas "dirty," in conjunction
withlaws prohibiting thirdpartiesfromreceivingfinancialsupportfrom
prostitutionand legal rules of thumbthat treatsex workersas suspect
parents,tendsto underminethe viabilityof prostitutionas a source of
financialsupportfor sex workers'families(McClintock 1992). Crimi-
nalizationhas tendedto isolate women fromone another(as evidenced
by laws makingit illegal for a set numberof women to live together),
encouragedependencyon pimps,and cut offmobilitybetweenprostitu-
tion and otherformsof work (McClintock 1992): "Prostituteswere up-
rootedfromtheirneighborhoodsand had to findlodgingsin otherareas
ofthecityand in theperiphery.... Cut offfromothersustainingrelation-
ships,increasingly theywereforcedto relyon pimpsforemotionalsecu-
rityand forprotectionagainstlegal authorities.Indeed,the wide preva-
lenceof pimpsin theearlytwentieth centurymeantthatprostitution had
shiftedfroma female-to a male-dominatedtrade,and thereexisted a
greaternumberof thirdpartieswithan interestin prolongingwomen's
stayon the streets"(Walkowitz1980, 128).
The formof prostitution encouragedby thishistoricalprocessis one
in whichthesubversivepotentialof prostitution is limitedevenwhilethe
supplyof prostitutesis maintained.Dependencyon pimps limitsprosti-
tutes'abilityto achievefinancialindependenceand controloverworking
conditions,includingprotectionfromand deterrence of pimp,client,and
police violence. "Crackdowns,and arrestsin general,tend to reinforce
the dependenceof prostitutes on pimps,who are oftentheironlyfriends
outside of jail who can arrangefor bail, an attorney,child care, etc."
(Alexander1987b, 198). Social stigmaagainstprostitutesmakes it dif-
ficultforprostitutesto gain employment outsideof the sex industry, en-
couragingprostitutes to move around,again making it more difficult
to
formsupportivecommunitiesimportantto the productionof counter-
hegemonicpracticesdiscussedabove. "Crackdownsalso pressuremany
womento moveon to othercities,cuttingofftheirconnectionswithlocal
friendsand networksof support,includingagenciesthatcould help them
leave prostitutionif theywantedto" (Alexander1987b, 198). Even the
most prominentimage of the prostitute,that of the gaudily dressed
woman loiteringon the streetcorner(and the concomitantjustification
forattackingprostitution, "cleaningup the streets"),is generatedby the
veryillegalityittendsto reaffirm: "Underthecurrentregime,sinceprosti-
tuteshave no legal way of notifying clientsof theirwhereabouts,high

visibilityin public places is the easiest way to meet clients" (Kandel

1992, 338).
Criminalizationalso both exacerbatesand createsracistand classist
aspectsof sex workbyprovidingpolice a legal meansto harassand con-
trol poor women and women of color.21Althoughit is estimatedthat
approximately 40 percentof prostitutes are womenof color,theyconsti-
tute 85 percentof those imprisonedforprostitution (Alexander1987b,
197). Moreover,the hierarchiesof selectiveenforcement and police tol-
erationtend to place the greatestburdenof criminalization on the dis-
proportionate number of poor women and women of color who workas
low-statusstreetprostitutes:"By licensing[informally or throughlegal-
ization]indoorwork,and harassingstreetwork,policeisolatethepoorest
women,who cannotaffordto pay highrentsand who havetheleast ac-
cess to health care, social resources,and legal aid. The police thereby
ensurethatpoor,black womenpaytheheaviestpriceforthecriminaliza-
tionofsexwork"(McClintock1992, 87). Streetprostitutes, too, arethose
most vulnerableto appallinglyhighratesof rape and abuse (Alexander
1987b, 201) and yetmostabandonedbythelaw throughitsindifference
to theirsituationand sex workers'fearofpressingtheirclaimsin a system
thatclassifiesthemas criminals(McClintock1992).
Moreover,thecriminalization ofprostitutionhas frequently beenused
as a rationaleforsurveillanceand harassmentof poor,ethnic,and immi-
grantneighborhoodsinto whichprostitutes tendto be pushed (McClin-
tock 1992, 85). Commonplace laws againstsolicitationof a prostitute,
forinstance,are employedbypolice harassanyman or woman on the
to
streetof whomtheyare suspicious,a practicedisproportionately directed
at alreadymarginalizedgroups.These laws simultaneously createmore
dangerousconditionsforsex workers,forcingsolicitationsto be as rapid
as possibleand interfering withsex workers'abilityto checkout a poten-
tial clientand negotiateforsafesex (86).
Throughthese examples one can see how criminalizationdoes not
simply"repress"a preexistent thingcalled "prostitution,"nor is it irrele-
vant to a practiceinsteadwhollydeterminedby underlying featuresof
21
Otherracializedaspectsofsexworkmayincludeclients'desires forinterracialsex
predicatedon raciststereotypesofwomenofcolor,something thatappearsto playa par-
ticularly
important roleinEuro-American sextourism inSoutheastAsia(McClintock
1992;Shrage1992).Although inthecaseofsextourism suchracializationappearsto
playa majorstructuring roleintheindustry,thereis lessevidenceto suggestthatthisis
thecaseintheEuro-American nationsunderconsideration here.To theextentthatitis
thecase,itis unclearwhattheimplications wouldbe forsexworkspecifically, sincesuch
desirewouldpresumably
racialized notbe uniqueto commercial sex.As discussedinthe
maintextbelow,however, thereis somereasonto believethatmostforms ofcriminaliza-
tiondisproportionatelydisempower womenofcolor,andtherefore forms ofdecriminaliza-
tionthatmaximize sexworkers' tochooseandcontrol
ability theirclientsmight be the
mosteffective wayto counteract thisformofracismwithin thepracticeofsexworkitself.

male sexualityand/orcapitalism.Instead,it aids in the productionof a

particularmode of sex work. Criticswho overlookthisproductiverole
are at riskof gettingtheiranalysispreciselybackward.Concludingfrom
currentcharacteristics thatitis a bad thing,theymaycon-
of prostitution
clude thateffortsshould be made to deterand eliminateit. Butifexisting
effortsto deteror eliminatesex work are themselvesthe causes of its
oppressivecharacteristics, thentheappropriateresponsemightbe to elim-
inatethoseefforts, not commercialsex.
Of course,the social/cultural productionof prostitutionalso occurs
via mechanismsexclusiveneitherto the law nor to prostitution because
sex work is articulatedwith otherformsof social practiceas well. Al-
thoughrelatively littledetailedhistoricalworkhas been done on thepro-
ductionof the client'sdesire(Shrage 1992), it hardlyseems far-fetched
to speculatethat the culturaldenigrationof chastity(especiallyamong
men), the attributionof various disordersto "not gettingany,"and the
equation of a "healthy"sex lifewithgeneralwell-beingall serveto en-
courage prostitution even as the laws denyit. There is pleasure,too, in
the genderedposition of sexual mastery(illusoryor not) purchased
throughprostitution.
Conclusion
As muchas the recentEuro-Americanhistoryof prostitution has wit-
nessed its organizationwithinthe deploymentof sexualityas the mirror
image of the sexualityof alliance (heterosexual,procreativemonogamy)
and militatedagainstthe subversionof sexual identityand the sex/work
distinction,it has also providedpossibilitiesforresistance.While forcing
prostitutes into well-definedgeographicareas has served as a public
markerof theirdifference, it has also encouragedtheproximity necessary
forpoliticalorganizing;similarly, theclassificationof prostitution
as the
resultof deviantfemaledesireencouragedhistoricalconnectionsbetween
prostitutesand lesbiansthathelped prostitutesemulatethe successesof
lesbian activists(Nestle 1987).
Even within the prostitutionexchange, certainlya transactionin-
scribedwithinpowers generationof desireand circumscription of mate-
rial and sexual options,the instabilityof contextand eventallow for
power and resistanceto coexist. "Prostitution also involvesan equation
of sex withpower:fortheman/customer, thepowerconsistsof his ability
to 'buy' access to any numberof women; forthe woman/prostitute, the
powerconsistsof her abilityto set the termsof her sexuality,and to de-
mand substantialpaymentfor her time and skills" (Alexander 1987b,
189). The extentto which sex workershave the opportunitiesto exer-
cise power or act in resistancedepends thoroughlyon the sociocultural

context,includingtheirown and thebroaderculture'sunderstanding and

evaluationof theiractions,thegeneralorganizingdiscursiveand institu-
tional featuresof boththeworkplaceand sexuality,and thesocial prac-
ticesthathelpregulateand structure sex workers'lives.Prominent among
thesefeaturesare enforcement of laws criminalizing prostitutionand/or
associatedactivities,nonenforcement of laws on thebasis of sex workers'
involvement in prostitution,and limitedaccess to social servicesand legal
resourceson thebasis of prostitution's stigma,and/orclassifica-
illegality,
tion as nonwork.
As long as prostitution is criminalized,sex workers'access to institu-
tionalpowerand abilityto organizeformoreare frustrated byeconomic
and legal marginalization.Insteadof offering protectionagainstabusive
pimps and customers,the police are a constantthreat.Exclusion from
social benefitspremisedon employment(e.g., workers'compensation,
disabilityand unemployment insurance,the earned income tax credit)
and the added burdensof illegalityunderminethepossibilitiesforfinan-
cial independenceand encouragerelianceon pimps and alliances with
organizedcrimeand drugtrafficking. Aside fromthe broad culturaland
political implicationsof decriminalization, legallyrecognizingprostitu-
tion as a formof workand prostitutes as workers,withall theattendant
rights(e.g., unionization)and protections(e.g., againstfraud,abuse, ha-
rassment,theft,healthhazards) and freeof restrictive and stigmatizing
limitations(e.g., isolatingzoninglaws, registration withthepolice,pro-
hibitionson sharinglivingspace and earnings)would offerconcreteim-
provements to thelivesof sex workersthemselves.
Despite the advantagesof decriminalization, it is crucialto recognize
that criminallaws specificto sex work are hardlythe only structuring
social forces.Prostitutes'rightsgroupsgenerallysupport"decriminaliza-
tion" of sex work in the sense of eliminatingprostitution-specific laws
and subsumingsex workunderthegeneralheadingof serviceworkwhile
opposing"legalization"in thesenseoflegallyauthorizedschemespermit-
tingsex workunderspecialconditions(e.g.,licensedbrothels).22 A world
withoutprostitution-specific laws,however, is not a world lackingin legal
and economicstructures thataffectsex work.As bothShannonBell and
Laurie Shragehave recentlyargued,advocatesof decriminalization may
be blindto waysthatcapitalisteconomiesare likelyto operateto disem-
powerand oppresssex workers(Bell 1994, 122; Shrage1994, 84). These
limitations, whilesubstantial,are likelysmallerthanunderconditionsof
criminalizationthatfurther curtailthe politicaland economicpower of
sex workersand deprivethemof existingsocial welfareprovisionsthat
militateagainsttheworsteffectsof capitalism.Whilenot settlingforset-
tingprostitution on par withotherformsof work-which in theUnited
22
Scibelli1987;McClintock 1993;Bell1994.
1992;Jenness

States, for instance,are not accompanied by adequate guaranteesof

healthcare, paid maternity leave,safe workingconditions,and rightsto
unionizeand whichmaybe structured by racismand (hetero)sexism-it
is equally importantnot to treatgeneralfailuresof contemporary Euro-
Americanmarketeconomiesas unique to sex work. Neithershould one
ignore ways in which distinctionsbetweenprostitutionand legitimate
workmaythemselvesreinforce theseoppressivestructures.
In additionto generalfailuresof thewidersocietythatwould applyto
a decriminalizedsex work, theremightalso be specificfeaturesof sex
work that requirespecial attention,just as, for instance,both medical
careand coal miningrequireelementsofregulationin lightoftheirpartic-
ular features.23 Shragehas arguedforwhat she calls "radical regulation"
of sex work througha systemof semiprofessionalindividuallicensing
programsincludingcollegecourseworkin disciplinesrelevantto sexual-
itylike biology,psychology,and historyand democraticallyconstituted
advisoryboards empoweredto promulgatestandards of professional
practice(1994, 158-61). Givenhistoricalprecedentsof extensiveand op-
pressiveregulationof sexualityand sex workersby medical,legal, and
psychologicalprofessionalcommunities(Nestle 1987), I am rathermore
wary of the powers of professionalizationand standardizationthan
Shrage.Nonetheless,therecould be good cause to ensurethatsex work-
ershaveaccess to information, and/orotherresourcesthatcould
training,
enhance theircontrolover theirworkinglives and make themsaferas
well. Similarly,specificarrangementsto protectboth sex workersand
theirclientsfromsexuallytransmitted diseases may be appropriate,but
itwill be importantto be waryof thedeeplyingrainedtendenciesto stig-
matize and controlprostitutesunderthe guise of disease preventionby
blamingdisease transmission on prostitutesand not on theirclientswhile
ignoring disease transmission throughnoncommercialsex by scape-
goatingprostitutes(Alexander1987a; Bell 1994).
Prostitution, especiallyin the formsit could take ifproperlydecrimi-
nalized and regulated,24 offerssubversivepractical and discursivepo-
tential to sex workers,feminists,sex radicals, and progressivesmore
23
Ifsexitself(orthesortsofsexforwhichpeoplego to prostitutes) were,at leastun-
dercurrent conditions,inherentlyviolentandoppressive regardlessofitscommercial as-
pectandregardless ofanyvariationsincontext thatactually occur(e.g.,differencesinsex-
ual practicesanddesiresamongmenand/or women),thenno amountofregulation could
alterprostitution'sfundamental oppressiveness,although variouslegalschemes might ex-
acerbateitmoreorless.Suchan argument seemsto be implicitinmuchradicalfeminist
work,butI takeitsassumptions ofthedepthandbreadth oftherelationship between
sexuality andviolence to be exaggerated(Finley1988).
24 I havetriedto sketch someofthefeatures
verybroadly suchregulation might in-
clude.Although I thinkmygeneral analysis appropriateto statesthatshareto a signifi-
cantdegreethebroadpolitical, economic, andhistorical
cultural, featuresI havediscussed
above,undoubtedly therearemoreparticular nationalandlocaldifferences thatwould
require variationsinthepreciseformofimplementation.

generally.The complex,multipleprostitutionexchangeis a siteof power-

ful sexual pluralism,capable of contestinghegemonicconstructionsof
sexualitythatat firstseem farremoved:the movementfromanatomical
dis-
sex to sexualityto identityand themaintenanceof thepublic/private
tinctionthroughthe isolationof sexualityand intimacyfromproductive
workand commercialexchange.
Departmentof Scienceand TechnologyStudies

CornellUniversity
References
Alexander, Priscilla.1987a. "ProstitutesAreBeingScapegoated forHeterosexual
AIDS."In DelacosteandAlexander 1987,248-63.
1987b."Prostitution: A DifficultIssueforFeminists." In Delacosteand
Alexander 1987,184-214.
Anderson, Elizabeth S. 1990."Is Women's Labora Commodity?" Philosophy and
PublicAffairs 19 (Winter): 71-92.
Barret,Michele,andMaryMcIntosh.1991. TheAnti-Social Family.2d ed.New
York:Verso.
Bataille,George.1985. "TheNotionofExpenditure." In VisionsofExcess,ed.
AllanStoekl,116-29.Minneapolis: UniversityofMinnesota Press.
Bell,Laurie,ed. 1987. Good Girls/Bad Girls:Feminists and Sex TradeWorkers
Face toFace.Seattle:Seal.
Bell, Shannon.1994. Reading,Writing, and Rewriting the Prostitute Body.
Bloomington: IndianaUniversity Press.
Butler,Judith. 1990. GenderTrouble.NewYork:Routledge.
Davis, Karen Elizabeth. 1990. "I LoveMyself WhenI AmLaughing." Journalof
SocialPhilosophy 21(2/3):5-24.
Delacoste,Frederique, andPriscillaAlexander, eds. 1987.Sex Work:Writing by
WomenintheSex Industry. Pittsburg:Cleis.
Derrida, Jacques.1982."Signature EventContext." InhisMargins ofPhilosophy,
trans.AlanBass,307-30.Chicago:University ofChicagoPress.
DuBois,EllenCarol,and LindaGordon.1984. "SeekingEcstasyon theBattle-
field:DangerandPleasure inNineteenth-Century Feminist SexualThought." In
PleasureandDanger:Exploring FemaleSexuality, ed. CaroleS. Vance,31-49.
Boston:Routledge & KeganPaul.
Dworkin, Andrea. 1987. Intercourse.New York:FreePress.
. 1989.Pornography: MenPossessing Women. NewYork:Plume.
Ehrenreich, Barbara,Elizabeth Hess,andGloriaJacobs.1986.Re-making Love:
TheFeminization of Sex. Garden N.Y.:
City, Doubleday.
Ericsson, Lars.1980. "TheChargesagainstProstitution: AnAttempt at a Philo-
sophicalAssessment." Ethics90 (April):335-66.
Fechner, HollyB. 1994. "ThreeStoriesof Prostitution in theWest:Prostitutes'
Groups, Law and Feminist 'Truth."'Columbia Journal of Genderand Law
4(1):26-72.
Ferguson, Ann.1989. Bloodat theRoot.London:Pandora.

Finley,Lucinda. 1988. "The Nature of Domination and the Nature of Women:

Reflectionson FeminismUnmodified."NorthwesternUniversity Law Review
82 (Winter):352-86.
Foucault, Michel. 1978. The Historyof Sexuality.Vol. 1. New York: Random
House.
Freud,Sigmund.1962. Three Essays on the Theoryof Sexuality,trans.Steven
Marcus. New York: Basic.
Jaggar,Alison. 1991. "Prostitution'.In The Philosophyof Sex: Contemporary
Readings,ed. Alan Soble, 2d ed., rev.Savage,Md.: Rowman & Littlefield.
Jenness,Valerie. 1993. Making It Work:The Prostitutes'RightsMovementin
Perspective.New York: de Gruyter.
Kandel, Minouche. 1992. "Whoresin Court:JudicialProcessingof Prostitutes in
the Boston Municipal Court in 1990." Yale Journalof Law and Feminism4
(Spring):329-52.
Koedt,Anne. 1972. "The Mythof theVaginalOrgasm."In VoicesfromWomen's
Liberation,ed. Leslie B. Tanner,158-66. New York:New AmericanLibrary.
Laclau, Ernesto.1990a. "The Impossibility of Society."In his New Reflections
on
theRevolutionof Our Time,89-92. New York:Verso.
. 1990b. "New Reflectionson the Revolutionof Our Time." In his New
Reflectionson theRevolutionof Our Time,3-85. New York:Verso.
Laclau, Ernesto,and Chantal Mouffe. 1985. Hegemonyand Socialist Strategy.
London: Verso.
MacKinnon, Catharine. 1989. Toward a FeministTheory of the State. Cam-
bridge,Mass.: HarvardUniversity Press.
Marcus, Sharon. 1992. "FightingBodies,FightingWords:A Theoryand Politics
of Rape Prevention." In FeministsTheorizethePolitical,ed. JudithButlerand
Joan Scott.New York: Routledge.
Marx, Karl. 1964. The Economicand PhilosophicManuscriptsof 1844, ed. Dirk
J. Struik,trans.MartinMilligan.New York: International.
McClintock,Anne. 1992. "Screwingthe System:Sexwork,Race, and the Law."
boundary2 19(2):70-95.
Mohanty,Satya P. 1993. "The EpistemicStatus of CulturalIdentity."Cultural
Critique24 (Spring):41-80.
Nestle,Joan. 1987. "Lesbians and Prostitutes: A HistoricalSisterhood."In Dela-
coste and Alexander1987, 231-47.
Oldenburg,VeenaTalwar.1990. "Lifestyleas Resistance:The Case oftheCourte-
sans of Lucknow,India." FeministStudies16(2):259-87.
Olsen, Frances. 1983. "The Familyand the Market: A Studyof Ideology and
Legal Reform."Harvard Law Review 96(7):1497-1578.
Overall, Christine.1992. "What's Wrong with Prostitution?Evaluating Sex
Work."Signs:Journalof Womenin Cultureand Society17(4):705-24.
Pateman,Carole. 1988. The Sexual Contract.Stanford,Calif.: StanfordUniver-
sityPress.
Pheterson,Gail, ed. 1989. A Vindicationof the Rightsof Whores:The Interna-
tionalMovementforProstitutes'Rights.Seattle:Seal.
Radin, MargaretJane.1987. "Market-Inalienability." Harvard Law Review 100
(June):1849-1937.
Rawls,John.1971. A TheoryofJustice.Cambridge,Mass.: Belknap.

Rubin,Gayle. 1975. "The Traffic in Women:Notes on the'PoliticalEconomy'of

Sex." In Towardan Anthropology of Women,ed. RaynaReiter,157-210. New
York: MonthlyReview.
. 1984. "ThinkingSex: Notes fora Radical Theoryof thePoliticsof Sexu-
ality."In Pleasure and Danger: Exploring Female Sexuality,ed. Carole S.
Vance,267-319. Boston:Routledge& Kegan Paul.
Scheman,Naomi. 1980. "Angerand thePoliticsofNaming."In Womenand Lan-
guage in Literatureand Society,ed. SallyMcConnell-Ginet,RuthBorker,and
NellyFurman,174-87. New York:Prager.
Scibelli,Pasqua. 1987. "EmpoweringProstitutes:A Proposal for International
Legal Reform."Harvard Women'sLaw Journal10 (Spring):117-57.
Scott,Joan. 1992. "'Experience.'" In FeministsTheorizethePolitical,ed. Judith
Butlerand JoanScott.New York:Routledge.
Shrage,Laurie. 1989. "Should FeministsOppose Prostitution?"Ethics 99(2):
347-61.
. 1992. "Is Sexual DesireRaced? The Social Meaningof InterracialProsti-
tution."Journalof Social Philosophy23(1):42-51.
. 1994. Moral Dilemmas of Feminism:Prostitution, Adultery, and Abor-
tion.New York: Routledge.
Turkel,Studs. 1974. Working.New York: Ballantine.Quoted in Oldenburg
1990.
Vance,Carole S. 1984. "Pleasureand Danger: Towarda Politicsof Sexuality."In
Pleasure and Danger: ExploringFemale Sexuality,ed. Carole S. Vance, 1-27.
Boston:Routledge& Kegan Paul.
Walkowitz,JudithR. 1980. "The Politicsof Prostitution." Signs6(1):123-35.
Weeks, Jeffrey. 1985. Sexuality and Its Discontents.London: Routledge &
Kegan Paul.
White,Luise. 1986. "Prostitution, and Class Consciousnessin Nairobi
Identity,
during World War II." Signs 11(2):255-73.
Williams,Joan C. 1991. "Gender Wars: SelflessWomen in the Republic of
Choice." New YorkUniversity Law Review66 (December):1559-1634.


Sex WorkSex Act Law, Labor, and Desire in Constructions of Prostitution

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Sex WorkSex Act Law, Labor, and Desire in Constructions of Prostitution

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Sex Work/SexAct:Law,Labor,and

Winter 1997 SIGNS 277

This content downloaded from 192.148.225.018 on September 08, 2017 03:15:04 AM

278 SIGNS Winter 1997

This content downloaded from 192.148.225.018 on September 08, 2017 03:15:04 AM

sexual servicesby Britishand Americansoldiersor the Thai state'sreli-

Winter 1997 SIGNS 279

This content downloaded from 192.148.225.018 on September 08, 2017 03:15:04 AM

theheelof totalizingtheory, sucha moveencouragesus to forgetthevari-

280 SIGNS Winter 1997

This content downloaded from 192.148.225.018 on September 08, 2017 03:15:04 AM

lar, one mustconsiderwhat makes an act "sexual" or "erotic."Having

Winter 1997 SIGNS 281

This content downloaded from 192.148.225.018 on September 08, 2017 03:15:04 AM

experiencedas thoroughly relationaland reciprocal:sex happensbetween

Competing narrativesof prostitution

282 SIGNS Winter 1997

This content downloaded from 192.148.225.018 on September 08, 2017 03:15:04 AM

to juxtaposewithsome of thetheoriesin question.9Sex workersare not

Winter 1997 SIGNS 283

This content downloaded from 192.148.225.018 on September 08, 2017 03:15:04 AM

in illegal streetprostitutionbecause of the exploitative,degrading,and

284 SIGNS Winter 1997

This content downloaded from 192.148.225.018 on September 08, 2017 03:15:04 AM

Whileitis importantto maintaina criticalperspective on claimsabout

Winter 1997 SIGNS 285

This content downloaded from 192.148.225.018 on September 08, 2017 03:15:04 AM

libertyto contract.As longas theprostitution contractwas notconceived

286 SIGNS Winter 1997

This content downloaded from 192.148.225.018 on September 08, 2017 03:15:04 AM

women,theburdensofsexual harassmenton thejob, and thesegregation

Winter 1997 SIGNS 287

This content downloaded from 192.148.225.018 on September 08, 2017 03:15:04 AM

beings.Hence, Marx wrote: "Prostitution is only a specificexpression

14 Shrage1989,1992,1994;Overall1992;Fechner 1994.Note,however, theambigu-

288 SIGNS Winter 1997

This content downloaded from 192.148.225.018 on September 08, 2017 03:15:04 AM

Oftenthe argumentis simplya circularappeal to "sex." Pateman,for

Winter 1997 SIGNS 289

This content downloaded from 192.148.225.018 on September 08, 2017 03:15:04 AM

characterizations ofcommercialsex as inherently degradingto prostitutes

290 SIGNS Winter 1997

This content downloaded from 192.148.225.018 on September 08, 2017 03:15:04 AM

providesome answers.It is not sex workper se thatpromotesoppressive

Winter 1997 SIGNS 291

This content downloaded from 192.148.225.018 on September 08, 2017 03:15:04 AM

prostitutionas the violentappropriationof women'ssexuality,radical

292 SIGNS Winter 1997

This content downloaded from 192.148.225.018 on September 08, 2017 03:15:04 AM

distinctionby construingindividualeroticdesire as profoundlysocial.

What is the object of the exchange?

Winter 1997 SIGNS 293

This content downloaded from 192.148.225.018 on September 08, 2017 03:15:04 AM

And yetwhat is to be made of prostitution as sex work? How are

294 SIGNS Winter 1997

This content downloaded from 192.148.225.018 on September 08, 2017 03:15:04 AM

commonsense termsloveis a paradigmatically noneconomic matter and

Winter 1997 SIGNS 295

This content downloaded from 192.148.225.018 on September 08, 2017 03:15:04 AM

Mohanty1993).19That theman and woman in our imaginaryencounter

296 SIGNS Winter 1997

This content downloaded from 192.148.225.018 on September 08, 2017 03:15:04 AM

relationsbetweenthe participants.This is not to say thattherewill not