Help Us Stay Paywall-Free

We rely on readers to keep our website open to all. Help sustain a public space for collective reasoning and imagination—make a tax-deductible donation today.

Image: Wikimedia

April 3, 2022

Do Laws Criminalizing Sex Work Violate the Constitution?

New writing on sex in today's reading list.

“Do laws criminalizing prostitution violate the Constitution?” asks Yale sexuality scholar Joseph J. Fischel in his brand new essay. Spoiler alert: the answer is “probably.” Indeed, several sex workers and sex worker collectives have recently challenged anti-prostitution laws in lower courts. Citing the Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas that gay sex cannot be criminalized, they have argued that commercial sex should be legal too. But even as judges remain unreceptive (often anchoring their disagreements in whorephobic mischaracterizations of sex workers), Fischel still encourages us to engage seriously with the “prostitution–Constitution” question, as he terms it. Doing so is important “not only in the hopes of appealing to a future judiciary,” Fischel writes, “but also in the service of a more expansive politics of sexual freedom.”

In an additional piece penned by Fischel in today’s reading list, he explores the contradictions at the core of pornography and its political economy. Reviewing four recent books, he shows how porn performers and artists possess a unique vision for what labor justice and erotic fulfillment could look like—but draconian regulations and exploitative work conditions mean they’re fighting an uphill battle.

Pornography is also explored in Lisa Duggan’s December 2021 essay “Me Too Déjà Vu.” Duggan suggests that the disagreements between feminists about what to think of porn occupies too prominent a place in how we remember the 1980s sex wars. Instead, a central component that is often lost in present-day recollections, such as Amia Srinivasan’s The Right to Sex, was a debate over the politics of queer desire.

Duggan’s review was our second piece to explore Srinivasan’s book. In the first, Becca Rothfeld paired it with other works that explore the gap between sex that is good and sex that is virtuous. While Rothfeld acknowledges that consent is a matter of urgent ethical concern, she laments the erasure of female desire and agency in our conversations about sexual harm. “Sex that is merely consensual is about as rousing as food that is merely edible, as drab as a cake without icing,” she writes. “Even in our era of ostensible liberation, women face emotional and social pressures, both externally imposed and uneasily internalized, to appease men at the cost of their own enjoyment.”

Two additional new essays round out today’s reading list. Mark D. Jordan, Harvard professor of sexuality and religion, notes that what we can learn from Michel Foucault’s Confessions of the Flesh—especially its insights into Christian ideas of virginity and sexual sin—is complicated by the fact that the book was published against Foucault’s dying wish. “To want his last word on sexuality is to misunderstand Foucault’s dance with systems of power.” And in the reading list’s last essay, Francey Russell rewatches that scene in Basic Instinct and considers how the erotic content in films asks us to relate to the people on screen.

Joseph J. Fischel
The Supreme Court recognizes the right of consenting adults to an erotic life free of state control. Given that, it shouldn't matter whether sex is your job.
Mark D. Jordan
Against the philosopher’s dying wish, the final volume of History of Sexuality has now been published. How should we approach it, and what can it teach us about how Christianity shaped the modern self?
Lisa Duggan
The 1980s sex wars are most strongly associated with conflict over pornography. But a central component, often lost in present-day recollections, was a debate over the politics of queer desire.
Joseph J. Fischel
Porn performers have a unique vision for labor justice and erotic fulfillment, but they face draconian regulation and exploitative work conditions.
Becca Rothfeld

On feminism, sex, and the ethics of desire.

Francey Russell
The release of a restored Basic Instinct alongside director Paul Verhoeven’s newest erotic epic, Benedetta, offers an occasion to think not only about the ethics and politics of watching bodies on screen, but about the uncanny relationship between film and reality.

Our weekly themed Reading Lists compile the best of Boston Review’s archive. Sign up for our newsletters to get them straight to your inbox before they appear online.

Boston Review is nonprofit and reader funded.

We believe in the power of collective reasoning and imagination to create a more just world. That’s why we’re committed to keeping our website free and open to everyone, regardless of ability to pay. But we can’t do it without the financial support of our readers.

Help sustain a public space for collective reasoning and imagination, without ads or paywalls:

Become a supporting reader today.

Get Our Newsletter

Sign up to get vital reading on politics, literature, and more sent straight to your inbox.

While we have you...

Most Recent

Lewis Gordon and Nathalie Etoke discuss the space for freedom opened up by Black existentialist thought.

Nathalie Etoke, Lewis Gordon

The post-work movement reckons with reproductive labor.

Rachel Fraser

Melvin Rogers and Neil Roberts discuss the difficulty of keeping faith in a foundationally anti-Black republic.

Melvin Rogers, Neil Roberts

Just in time for the holidays, get any three print issues of Boston Review for just $35 – that’s 40% off the cover price!

Before December 9, mix and match any three issues for one low price using code 3FOR35.

Just in time for the holidays, get any three print issues of Boston Review for just $35 – that’s 40% off the cover price!

Before December 9, mix and match any three issues for one low price using code 3FOR35.

We can't publish without your support.

For nearly 50 years, Boston Review has been a home for collective reasoning and imagination on behalf of a more just world.

But our future is never guaranteed. As a small, independent nonprofit, we have no endowment or single funder. We rely on contributions from readers like you to sustain our work.

If you appreciate what we publish and want to help ensure a future for the great writing and constructive debate that appears in our pages, please make a tax-deductible donation today.

"An indispensable pillar of the public sphere."

That’s what sociologist Alondra Nelson says of Boston Review. Independent and nonprofit, we believe in the power of collective reasoning and imagination to create a more just world.

That’s why there are no paywalls on our website, but we can’t do it without the support of our readers. Please make a tax-deductible donation to help us create a more inclusive and egalitarian public sphere—open to everyone, regardless of ability to pay.