A Feminist Discourse Analysis of Sex 'Work' - of /courses - Victoria ...

338 Feminism & Psychology 11(3)
The pervasive construction of sex work as a legitimate market exchange was
achieved, in part, by the jargon associated with the sex–money exchange that
corresponded to everyday market exchange terminology. Thus prostitution as sex
‘work’ can be understood as a powerful discourse or metaphor. An important
aspect of metaphor is that it highlights some features of an object or experience
while hiding others (Weatherall and Walton, 1999). The market exchange metaphor
of prostitution highlighted the kinds of themes associated with a liberal
feminist approach; that it is a contract entered into freely. However, it hides the
economic desperation leading many into sex work as well as the vulnerability to
exploitation that many aspects of sex work engender.
We (the authors) think it is worth noting a conundrum of the current position
of the NZPC as a liberatory approach. On the one hand, endorsing the decriminalization
of sex work has the potential to help protect sex workers, by lifting the
secrecy that functions to condone rape and other forms of violence against sex
workers. So the promotion of sex work as a legitimate market exchange may help
protect workers and ensure a fair wage. However, any legislation to control that
market may actually transform sex work into something that workers have less
control over. Furthermore, legitimating sex work may have, from a feminist
perspective, the less desirable effect of encouraging more women who are
economically desperate to become sex workers. It seems, then, that the NZPC
strategy will achieve a truly liberatory outcome only if it is supported by a more
equitable economic climate where women are able to support themselves and
their dependants. Until sex work is just one choice among many for people, it
seems likely that no form of legislation will totally eradicate the exploitation of
sex workers.
An important difference between the radical and liberal feminist accounts of
sex work is the different emphasis they place on the exploitative versus liberatory
aspects of prostitution respectively. Instead of treating these alternative versions
as competing definitions of what sex work means, our analysis examined the
discursive articulation of abuse and freedom in participants’ accounts. We
found that in accounts where participants discussed being in control they were
positioned as powerful and agentic. In contrast, descriptions of exploitation and
violence tended to construct the subject in a powerless position. Thus there were
similarities between feminist theoretical accounts of sex work and the ones the
participants gave. However, the functions of the two sets of accounts differ. The
feminist frameworks are used as arguments for or against sex work, whereas the
participants were constructing themselves and their experiences as reasonable
and rational. This kind of discursive approach is useful because it resists making
general claims about what sex work is and what sex workers like. Instead we have
shown how multiple and contradictory views function to reproduce and sometimes
challenge dominant understandings of sex and prostitution.