Understanding Germaine Greer’s Views on Prostitution

Germaine Greer, the prominent Australian feminist scholar and author of the groundbreaking “The Female Eunuch” (1970), holds a deeply critical and controversial stance on prostitution. She views it fundamentally as a form of sexual slavery and exploitation, inextricably linked to patriarchal oppression. Her perspective has sparked intense debate within feminist circles and beyond, challenging notions of sex work as a legitimate choice or form of labor. Understanding Greer’s arguments requires examining the core tenets of her radical feminism, her views on male sexuality and power, and the historical context of feminist debates on the sex industry.

What is Germaine Greer’s core argument about prostitution?

Germaine Greer fundamentally argues that prostitution is not a freely chosen profession but a system of sexual exploitation and slavery, inherently degrading and damaging to women, sustained by patriarchal power structures and male demand.

Greer rejects the idea that prostitution represents a legitimate form of work or sexual liberation. She sees it as the ultimate commodification of the female body under patriarchy. Her core argument posits that:

Inherent Exploitation: Prostitution is built on the exploitation of women’s bodies, often driven by economic desperation, coercion, or trafficking. The power imbalance between the buyer (typically male) and the seller (typically female) is intrinsic and insurmountable.
Patriarchal Control: It serves as a pillar of patriarchal control, allowing men sexual access to women’s bodies outside traditional relationships, reinforcing the notion that women’s bodies are male property.
Sexual Slavery: She frequently uses the term “sexual slavery” to emphasize the lack of genuine autonomy and the inherent violence and degradation involved. The transaction, she argues, is inherently dehumanizing.
Damage to Women: Greer contends that prostitution causes profound physical and psychological harm to the women involved, regardless of whether they claim agency, viewing such claims as often a survival mechanism or false consciousness.

This position places her firmly within the “abolitionist” or “radical feminist” camp regarding prostitution, aligning with figures like Kathleen Barry and Andrea Dworkin, who see the sex industry as incompatible with women’s liberation.

How does Greer differentiate prostitution from other forms of labor?

Greer vehemently rejects the “sex work” framing, arguing that the unique intimacy, invasiveness, and potential for violence inherent in sexual acts differentiate prostitution fundamentally from other forms of labor or service work.

For Greer, the comparison to other jobs fails because:

Bodily Invasiveness: Prostitution involves direct, intimate access to and use of a woman’s body in a way no other job does. This level of physical intrusion is seen as qualitatively different.
Objectification & Dehumanization: The transaction explicitly reduces the woman to her sexual function, treating her body as a commodity for male gratification in a uniquely objectifying manner.
Inherent Risk of Violence: The risk of physical and sexual violence is significantly higher and more inherent to the act itself compared to most other occupations.
Emotional & Psychological Toll: She argues the psychological consequences of separating one’s body from one’s self during sexual acts are uniquely damaging.

She sees the “labor” argument as a dangerous normalization of exploitation, masking the underlying power dynamics and harm.

What role does male sexuality play in Greer’s critique?

Central to Greer’s critique of prostitution is her analysis of male sexuality, which she views as socially constructed within patriarchy to be often entitled, detached, and focused on domination, creating the demand that drives the exploitative system.

Greer argues that:

Demand Driven: Prostitution exists primarily because of male demand for sexual access without intimacy, commitment, or equality.
Entitlement: Patriarchal culture fosters a sense of male entitlement to women’s bodies, which prostitution both feeds and satisfies.
Detachment & Objectification: The act of buying sex encourages men to view women purely as objects for gratification, reinforcing the separation of sex from emotional connection and mutual respect.
Power Imbalance: The transaction inherently embodies a power imbalance where the buyer holds economic and often physical power over the seller.

She sees little prospect for reforming male sexuality within the existing system, hence her call for abolition rather than regulation.

How did other feminists respond to Greer’s views on prostitution?

Greer’s abolitionist stance on prostitution sparked intense debate and significant opposition from other feminist perspectives, particularly from “sex-positive” feminists and those advocating for decriminalization or labor rights for sex workers, who argued her view denied women’s agency and ignored diverse experiences.

The feminist response has been deeply polarized:

Radical Feminist Support: Greer found strong allies among radical feminists like Andrea Dworkin, Catharine MacKinnon, and Kathleen Barry. They shared her view of prostitution as a cornerstone of patriarchal oppression and male violence, advocating for the “Nordic Model” (criminalizing buyers, decriminalizing sellers).
Sex-Positive Feminist Critique: Feminists like Ellen Willis, Gayle Rubin, and Carol Queen strongly opposed Greer. They argued:
- Denial of Agency: Accused Greer of paternalism, ignoring the voices and experiences of sex workers who claimed autonomy and choice.
- Stigmatization: Argued that her rhetoric further stigmatized sex workers and ignored the diversity of experiences within the industry.
- Sexual Liberation: Some saw aspects of sex work as potentially empowering or part of sexual liberation, challenging repressive norms.
- Focus on Choice & Labor Rights: Advocated for decriminalization to reduce violence and exploitation, allowing sex workers to organize for labor rights and safety.
Structural Critique: Other feminists focused on structural issues like poverty, lack of alternatives, racism, and colonialism as the root causes of exploitation, arguing that attacking prostitution without addressing these was ineffective.

This “Feminist Sex Wars” debate remains profoundly unresolved.

Did Greer engage directly with sex workers’ perspectives?

Critics frequently argue that Greer, particularly in her earlier, most polemical writings, did not sufficiently center or engage with the lived experiences and voices of sex workers themselves, often generalizing their experiences as universally exploitative and denying their claims of agency.

While Greer based her views on research into violence, trafficking, and the historical oppression of women, her rhetoric often:

Generalized Harm: Presented prostitution as universally and inherently harmful, potentially dismissing the nuanced accounts of some sex workers who reported varying degrees of autonomy or satisfaction.
Attributed False Consciousness: Framed claims of agency by sex workers as a result of patriarchal indoctrination (“false consciousness”) rather than authentic choice, which many found dismissive and disempowering.
Focused on System vs. Individual: Prioritized analyzing prostitution as a systemic pillar of patriarchy over individual narratives, sometimes leading to a perception of speaking *about* rather than *with* sex workers.

Later engagements show more nuance, but the core criticism regarding agency remains a key point of contention.

What are the implications of Greer’s views for policy on prostitution?

Germaine Greer’s abolitionist stance logically leads to support for policies aimed at eliminating the sex industry, specifically endorsing the “Nordic Model” (or Equality Model), which criminalizes the purchase of sex (targeting demand) while decriminalizing those who sell sex, combined with robust exit services.

The policy implications of her position are clear:

Criminalize Buyers (Johns): Punish the demand side, seen as the root of the exploitative system.
Decriminalize Sellers: Ensure women in prostitution are not criminalized or further victimized by the law, recognizing them as exploited individuals.
Provide Comprehensive Exit Services: Offer substantial social, economic, and psychological support (housing, job training, healthcare, counseling) to help individuals leave prostitution.
Oppose Legalization/Full Decriminalization: Greer strongly opposes models that fully legalize or decriminalize the sex industry (like in parts of Nevada or New Zealand). She believes this:
- Legitimizes and expands exploitation.
- Benefits pimps, traffickers, and brothel owners.
- Fails to address the inherent harm and power imbalance.
- Increases trafficking to meet normalized demand.

She views policy solely through the lens of reducing male demand and supporting exploited women out of the industry.

How does the Nordic Model align with Greer’s arguments?

The Nordic Model directly operationalizes Greer’s core arguments by targeting male demand (the buyers/johns) as the root cause of exploitation, decriminalizing the sold person to avoid victimizing them further, and emphasizing societal responsibility to provide exit strategies, reflecting her view of prostitution as systemic oppression rather than individual choice.

The alignment is strong:

Focus on Demand: Criminalizing buyers directly addresses Greer’s emphasis on male entitlement and demand as the engine of prostitution.
Non-Punishment of Prostituted Persons: Decriminalization of the seller aligns with seeing them as exploited, not criminals – shifting blame to the buyer and the system.
Exit Focus: The model’s emphasis on providing support services for those wanting to leave reflects Greer’s view that women need viable alternatives and societal help to escape exploitation.
Abolitionist Goal: The stated aim of the Nordic Model is the eventual abolition of prostitution as an institution, mirroring Greer’s ultimate objective.

Greer sees this model as the only policy approach consistent with a feminist understanding of prostitution as sexual exploitation.

How relevant are Greer’s views on prostitution in contemporary debates?

Germaine Greer’s views remain highly influential and fiercely contested in contemporary debates about sex work, continuing to define the “abolitionist” pole of the argument and shaping policy discussions, particularly around the Nordic Model, while facing ongoing challenges from sex worker rights advocates who prioritize decriminalization and labor rights.

Her relevance persists because:

Defining the Abolitionist Stance: She remains a key intellectual figurehead for the argument that prostitution is inherently exploitative and incompatible with gender equality.
Policy Influence: Her arguments underpin the rationale for the Nordic Model, adopted in various forms in several countries (Sweden, Norway, France, Ireland, Israel, Canada, etc.).
Framing the Debate: Her stark framing of prostitution as “sexual slavery” continues to shape how the issue is discussed in media, politics, and academia, forcing engagement with the harms of the industry.
Continued Controversy: Her stance provokes ongoing, heated debate, highlighting the deep divisions within feminism and society about sexuality, agency, labor, and exploitation.

However, contemporary debates also involve significant challenges to her perspective:

Sex Worker-Led Movements: Strong, global movements by sex workers themselves demanding decriminalization, labor rights, safety, and an end to stigma directly challenge her characterization of universal lack of agency and her dismissal of their demands.
Evidence on Policy Impacts: Research on the effects of the Nordic Model is contested. Critics argue it pushes the industry underground, making workers *less* safe and more vulnerable to violence and police harassment, without significantly reducing demand. Proponents point to reduced visible street prostitution and symbolic value.
Intersectional Analysis: Modern analysis often emphasizes how race, class, migration status, gender identity, and colonialism profoundly shape experiences within the sex industry, adding layers of complexity beyond Greer’s sometimes more universalist framing.
Diverse Sex Industry: The rise of online platforms, OnlyFans, and other forms of adult content creation complicates traditional definitions of prostitution and challenges simple abolitionist arguments.

Greer’s voice remains a powerful and provocative force, ensuring that fundamental questions about power, consent, exploitation, and liberation remain central to the conversation about the sex industry.

How do modern sex worker rights organizations view Greer’s arguments?

Modern sex worker rights organizations overwhelmingly reject Germaine Greer’s abolitionist stance, viewing her arguments as paternalistic, stigmatizing, harmful to their safety and livelihoods, and fundamentally denying their autonomy and right to self-determination. They see her as an opponent of their movement.

Their criticism focuses on:

Denial of Agency: They vehemently oppose her characterization of all sex work as non-consensual exploitation, asserting their right to define their own experiences and make choices about their bodies and work.
Increased Stigma & Danger: They argue that her rhetoric and support for the Nordic Model:
- Increase stigma against them, making them targets for violence and discrimination.
- Drive the industry underground under criminalization models (even partial ones targeting buyers), making it harder to screen clients, work together for safety, or report crimes to police.
- Fail to protect them from actual harms like violence, theft, or unsafe working conditions.
Harm of Rescue Industry: They critique “rescue” approaches often aligned with abolitionism as paternalistic and sometimes coercive, ignoring what workers say they actually need (safety, rights, freedom from police harassment).
Call for Decriminalization: These organizations universally advocate for the full decriminalization of sex work (removing criminal penalties for both buying and selling sex between consenting adults, while maintaining laws against exploitation, trafficking, and coercion). They argue this is the only way to ensure their safety, labor rights, access to justice, and ability to organize.
Centering Lived Experience: They demand that their voices and experiences be centered in policy discussions, arguing that Greer and others like her have historically spoken over them.

For these groups, Greer represents a perspective that actively works against their goals of safety, dignity, rights, and recognition of their work as labor.

Germaine Greer on Prostitution: Feminist Arguments, Controversies & Modern Debates