Pathologizing Sex Work

Nuts (1987) Official Trailer - Barbara Streisand, Richard Dreyfus Movie

https://youtu.be/eN_5odn1vaQ?si=7vhFnIuP6x0jVP7C

MONSTER - Trailer ( 2003 )

https://youtu.be/vq70brIQP40?si=pfJ2LfQPizQQaB5-

Sex work exists at the center of a polarizing debate. On one extreme, some women’s organizations tend to frame it purely as a product—a service like any other, exchanged for money. Other women’s organizations lean towards pathologizing it, claiming that no one would enter sex work voluntarily, insisting that sex workers must have a history of childhood abuse, much like how homosexuality was once falsely classified as a mental illness.

This pathologization of sex work is deeply ingrained in cultural narratives and historical biases. The idea that sex workers are victims of trauma is perpetuated in media, such as the film Nuts (1987), where the protagonist’s work is framed as a direct result of childhood sexual abuse. This perspective denies agency to sex workers, treating them as broken individuals rather than economic actors making calculated choices. The moral panic surrounding sex work often stems from a broader societal discomfort with transactional intimacy, reinforcing the belief that those who engage in it must be damaged in some way.

This perspective mirrors historical attitudes toward other marginalized groups. Just as homosexuality was once classified as a mental illness, sex work is often framed as inherently degrading or evidence of deeper psychological wounds. The assumption is that no “healthy” person would willingly choose it, reinforcing a paternalistic need to “rescue” sex workers rather than acknowledging their agency.

That’s not to say that sex work is free from harm. Like many high-risk professions, full-service sex work can lead to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The film Monster (2003) illustrates this reality, depicting the psychological toll on a sex worker who experiences extreme violence. However, while PTSD is a real consequence for some, it does not define the entire profession, nor does it imply that all sex workers are victims.

The problem with framing all sex workers as traumatized is that it ignores the structural issues that create harmful conditions. Many professions expose workers to potential PTSD, from emergency responders to military personnel. Yet, we don’t assume all police officers or soldiers have been forced into their roles due to childhood trauma. The insistence on linking sex work with pathology stems more from cultural biases than empirical evidence.

The most obvious and consistent reason people enter sex work is financial. The pay is significantly higher than many other available jobs, especially for marginalized individuals who face barriers to traditional employment. This economic reality often gets overlooked in discussions that focus solely on victimhood and pathology. Unlike exploitative labor framed as a noble struggle (such as low-wage factory work or caregiving roles), sex work is often dismissed as a last resort rather than a rational economic decision.

Moreover, financial autonomy plays a major role in why many choose sex work over other low-paying jobs. The ability to set one’s hours, work independently, and earn a livable wage without formal education or institutional barriers makes sex work a viable alternative to more exploitative labor markets.

Crucially, experiencing violence—whether within sex work or elsewhere—does not equate to being mentally ill. Assault is a crime, not a diagnosis. The framing of sex workers as inherently damaged individuals strips them of autonomy and ignores the structural conditions that make sex work a viable option. This rhetoric is especially dangerous because it shifts the blame onto individuals rather than addressing the broader systems of inequality that shape their choices.

Rather than reducing sex work to a pathology, it is essential to understand it within its broader economic and social contexts. Dismissing workers as mere commodities or inevitable victims does a disservice to the complexity of their experiences and the realities of their choices. A more nuanced approach recognizes sex work as labor—sometimes dangerous, sometimes empowering, but always shaped by economic and societal forces rather than simplistic narratives of trauma or exploitation.