ABSTRACT
National sex industries and the global sex industry are currently experiencing startling growth and profit levels (IBISWorld, 2007; Poulin, 2005). In consonance, the many problems that are now being recognized as intrinsically linked to the industry, harms to the health of women and girls (Jeffreys, 2004), organized crime and corruption (M. Sullivan, 2007), trafficking (Farr, 2004; Monzini, 2005), the early sexualization of girls (American Psychological Association, 2007), are growing apace. It is surprising in this context that many theorists and researchers on prostitution who define themselves as feminists, or concern themselves primarilywith the interests of women, are increasingly using euphemisms in their approach to prostitution. The language of feminist theorists on prostitution was affected by the normalization of the industry in the last decades of the 20th century. Though some remained critical (Barry, 1995; Jeffreys, 1997; Stark andWhisnant, 2004),many started to use a language more in tune with the neo-liberal economists, such as Milton Friedman, who were calling for the decriminalization of prostitution and its treatment just like any other industry. They began to use terms such as ‘agency’, ‘entrepreneurship’ and ‘rational choice’ to describe the experience of prostituted women. These approaches are a public relations victory for the international sex industry. In this chapter I shall critically analyse the neo-liberal language and ideas that many feminists have adopted to see whether they are suited to the new realities.
