Rudyard Kipling’s phrase “the most ancient profession” helped popularize a polite shorthand for sex work that kept the subject at a distance. Where euphemisms once softened conversation, they also obscured the realities and politics of sexual labour.
A new exhibition at the Bundeskunsthalle in Bonn, “Sex Work: A Cultural History,” surveys how sexual labour has been depicted, governed and lived across different times and places. Using artworks, archival materials, legal records and first‑hand testimony, the show maps the moralizing and highly politicized debates that have shaped public understanding of sex work.
Words carry meaning
One strand of the exhibition is a glossary tracing how labels have shifted and the judgments those labels carry. Co‑curator and sex worker activist Ernestine Pastorello points out the difficulty of researching sex work history when the people involved were described in so many different, often evasive ways. In the 19th century, for example, the term “prostitute” could be applied to any woman seen as overly visible in public life, whether she sold sex or not; that loose usage tied the word to poverty, addiction and supposed moral failings and left a legacy of stigma.
Other terms expose political motives. In the Soviet Union and other Communist states, people were prosecuted as “social parasites” for failing to perform officially sanctioned “socially useful work,” a label that criminalized those who lived outside state employment models, including people engaged in sex work.
Local slang shows how place and era shape meaning: the German slur “Stricher,” associated with male street‑based sex work, became linked in the late 20th century to marginalization around Berlin’s Bahnhof Zoo. More recently, digital platforms have given rise to roles like “porn performer” or creator on OnlyFans; some workers accept these terms, others reject them.
Reclaiming and contesting names
Sex workers and allies have helped reshape language. The modern phrase “sex work” was popularized in the late 1970s by US activist Carol Leigh to describe selling sexual services without moral judgment, creating a framework for organizing and advocacy. Pastorello argues that calling it “work” captures the exchange at issue and opens a clearer path to discussing rights and protections than morally loaded terms.
Communities have also reclaimed slurs, adopted occupational titles such as “escort” or “stripper,” and resisted labels imposed from outside as ways to control how their lives are framed. But not everyone agrees that “sex work” is neutral: anti‑trafficking groups and some scholars—among them organizations like the Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women and commentators such as Gunilla Ekberg—warn that the term can obscure coercion, poverty or constrained choices. The debate illustrates how language can highlight some experiences while obscuring others.
Labor, rights and recognition
For many advocates, including Pastorello, recognizing sex work as labour is central to advancing safety and rights. Framing it as work creates space to demand legal protections, health and safety measures, and collective bargaining. She argues that the right to do sex work should rest on labour rights, not on whether the individual finds the work empowering.
By foregrounding language, culture and personal testimony, the exhibition invites visitors to reconsider the words they use and the assumptions behind them. It asks who has been named, who has been left out of public discourse, and how different vocabularies shape policy and everyday attitudes.
“Sex Work: A Cultural History” is on view at the Bundeskunsthalle in Bonn through October 25, 2026.