“Lalun is a member of the most ancient profession in the world.” With that line from Rudyard Kipling’s 1888 short story “On the City Wall,” one of the most enduring euphemisms for sex work was popularized. The phrase avoided naming the work directly, reflecting a moral climate where indirect language made the subject easier to acknowledge and easier to keep at bay.

The Bundeskunsthalle in Bonn’s exhibition “Sex Work: A Cultural History” examines how sex work has been represented, regulated and experienced across societies and historical periods. Described by curators as “terrain permeated by moralizing and highly political discourses,” the show brings together art, archives, legal documents and contemporary voices to reveal how public debate has framed — and often distorted — the people doing this work.

From “parasite” to “sex worker”

One strand of the exhibition focuses on language. A glossary traces terms used to describe sex workers over time and shows what those words made visible or invisible, and how they shaped ideas about gender, morality and labor. Co‑curator and sex worker activist Ernestine Pastorello notes the difficulty of researching sex work history because labels change across eras and historical documents rely on euphemisms. In the 19th century, she says, “prostitute” could describe any woman who was “too visible” in public life, whether or not she sold sex. The label was often applied broadly — to women in poverty, those with addictions or those seen as socially deviant — making it unreliable for research and laden with negative connotations that persist.

Similar distortions appeared in other contexts. In the former Soviet Union and other Communist Bloc countries, sex workers were prosecuted under laws against “social parasites” — a category for able‑bodied adults deemed not to engage in “socially useful work” and living off income outside the official labor system. The language shows how authorities used words to police behavior and decide who counted as legitimate workers.

Placed together, the glossary’s terms reveal assumptions about class, gender and social worth. Some labels make marginalization explicit: “Stricher,” a derogatory German term mainly for men selling sex, derived from “auf den Strich gehen” (“walking the beat”), became closely associated in the 1990s and early 2000s with street‑based male sex work around Berlin’s Bahnhof Zoo, linking the word to urban marginalization and stigma.

In the digital era, terms such as “porn performer” reflect changes in how sexual labor is organized. From early subscription websites to creator‑driven platforms like OnlyFans, performers can produce and distribute content directly. Some identify as sex workers; others do not.

Reclaiming — and contesting — the name

The exhibition also shows how sex workers have shaped the language used about them. The term “sex work” was coined in the late 1970s by US activist Carol Leigh to describe an activity rather than apply a moral label. That linguistic shift made room for organizing, visibility and advocacy. Pastorello favors the term because it describes “nothing more and nothing less than what is actually being discussed” — the exchange of sexual services for money or goods as a means of financial support — and offers a clearer basis for discussion than terminology loaded with moral judgment.

Sex worker movements have reclaimed slurs, adopted labels such as “escort” or “stripper,” and challenged externally imposed terminology as ways of asserting control over how their work and lives are described. But the term “sex work” is contested. Critics focused on trafficking and exploitation — including groups such as the Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women and scholars like Gunilla Ekberg — argue it can obscure distinctions and make it harder to see situations where people sell sex because of poverty, coercion or lack of alternatives. This disagreement illustrates how language can clarify some experiences while rendering others less visible.

Language and labor rights

For Pastorello, recognizing sex work as work is essential to any discussion of rights. While acknowledging that not everyone enters the industry freely, she argues that naming it as labor opens up conversations about safety, protections and collective organization. “Characterizing it as work allows us to attack it from a trade‑union perspective,” she says. “It’s just a matter of common respect to acknowledge that we are workers and therefore deserve the same protection and the same rights.” She adds that empowerment should not be a precondition for recognition: the right to do sex work should depend on labor rights, not on subjective judgments about whether the work is empowering.

Taken together, the exhibition approaches sex work through culture, language and lived experience, suggesting that understanding begins with acknowledging complexity and attending to the words societies have used — and the people those words often left out.

The exhibition “Sex Work – A Cultural History” runs at the Bundeskunsthalle in Bonn through to October 25, 2026.

Edited by: Elizabeth Grenier

“Lalun is a member of the most ancient profession in the world.” With that line from Rudyard Kipling’s 1888 story “On the City Wall,” an enduring euphemism for sex work entered popular language. The phrase skirted explicit naming at a time when indirect words made the topic easier to acknowledge—and easier to keep at arm’s length.

A new show at the Bundeskunsthalle in Bonn, “Sex Work: A Cultural History,” examines how sex work has been represented, regulated and experienced across periods and places. The curators describe the subject as “terrain permeated by moralizing and highly political discourses.” Combining art, archives, legal records and contemporary testimony, the exhibition traces how public debate has framed—and sometimes distorted—sexual labor.

Words matter

One thread in the exhibition is a glossary of terms that maps changing vocabulary and the assumptions those words carry. Ernestine Pastorello, co‑curator and sex worker activist, notes that “sex work history is challenging to research because what we’re called is different in each era, and historical documents often rely on vague euphemisms.” In the 19th century, for instance, “prostitute” could label any woman deemed “too visible” in public life, whether or not she sold sex. That broad usage tied the term to poverty, addiction or perceived deviance, making it unreliable as a neutral historical category and loading it with stigma that endures.

Other historical labels reveal political aims. In the Soviet Union and other Communist Bloc states, authorities prosecuted sex workers under laws against “social parasites”—a catch‑all for people not engaged in officially sanctioned “socially useful work.” The language served to police conforming labor identities and to exclude those operating outside state frameworks.

Place and era shape slang too. The German derogatory “Stricher,” associated with male street‑based sex work, became linked in the 1990s and 2000s to marginalization around Berlin’s Bahnhof Zoo. In the digital age new roles such as “porn performer” have emerged as creators produce and distribute content directly via platforms like OnlyFans—some workers embrace those labels, others reject them.

Reclaiming and contesting names

Sex workers themselves have shaped terminology. The term “sex work” was coined in the late 1970s by US activist Carol Leigh to describe an activity rather than apply a moral judgment, creating room for organizing and advocacy. Pastorello says the phrase implies “nothing more and nothing less than what is actually being discussed”—the exchange of sexual services for money or goods—and offers a clearer basis for discussing rights and protections than vocabulary steeped in moralizing assumptions.

Movements have reclaimed slurs, adopted occupational labels such as “escort” or “stripper,” and resisted externally imposed language as ways to assert control over how their lives and labor are understood. But the shift has its critics: groups and scholars focused on trafficking and exploitation—including the Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women and Swedish policy expert Gunilla Ekberg—argue that “sex work” can obscure situations where people sell sex under duress, poverty or limited alternatives. The debate underscores that terminology can illuminate certain experiences while rendering others less visible.

Language, labor and rights

For Pastorello, recognizing sex work as work is essential to any conversation about rights. Naming it labor creates space to discuss safety, legal protections and collective bargaining. “Characterizing it as work allows us to attack it from a trade‑union perspective,” she says. “It’s just a matter of common respect to acknowledge that we are workers and therefore deserve the same protection and the same rights.” She adds that recognition should not hinge on whether the work is experienced as empowering: “Our right to do sex work should depend on our labor rights and not on whether it’s empowering or not.”

By approaching sex work through culture, language and lived experience, the exhibition invites viewers to reflect on how their own views have been shaped—by media, social norms and the words they grew up with—and to consider who those words have often excluded.

The exhibition “Sex Work – A Cultural History” runs at the Bundeskunsthalle in Bonn through October 25, 2026.

Edited by: Elizabeth Grenier