Kathleen Barry

"In 1991, the Coalition Against Trafficking in Women (CATW), an abolitionist group that [Kathleen] Barry founded, took its case of 'prostitution as slavery' to the United Nations. 'To be a prostitute was to be unconditionally sexually available to any male who bought the right to use a woman's body in whatever manner he chose,' CATW told the working group on contemporary forms of slavery. This unconditional availability and the man's right to do whatever he wanted was tantamount to ownership and slavery."

The paragraph above is from Nine Degrees of Justice by Bishakha Datta.

They didn't get anywhere. Sex workers choose their clients. They can and do deny their services to any man they choose. They tell the man what they will accept and what they won't. If a man wants anal sex without a condom he won't get it. There are no 'survivors' who say that he will. In Rachel Moran's book, for example, she states that she didn't have anal sex once.

So the whole basis of Barry's argument is false. The whole basis of the Radical Feminist argument is false. They don't know what they are talking about. Their hatred of men like me is based more on victim porn than reality.

Below is a quotation from Barry's book Female Sexual Slavery. From it we can see the real reason why she is opposed to prostitution. It's not that she really believes that a man can use a woman's body in whatever manner he chooses. She might think that some of her followers will believe that. The real reason is that prostitution is promiscuity and not 'intimacy'.

"We are really going back to the values women have always attached to sexuality, values that have been robbed from us, distorted and destroyed as we have been colonized through both sexual violence and so-called sexual liberation. They are the values and needs that connect sex with warmth, affection, love, caring. . . . Sexual values and the positive, constructive experience of sex must be based in intimacy. . . . Sexual intimacy precludes the proposition that sex is the right of anyone and asserts instead that it must be earned through trust and sharing. It follows then that sex cannot be purchased, legally acquired, or seized by force."

Carole Pateman and Kathleen Barry are foundational thinkers: Pateman provides the theory, Barry provides empirical analysis.

Sheila Jeffreys, Andrea Dworkin, Catharine A MacKinnon, Lorna Day and Julie Bindel extend the critique to policy, law, and activism.

Together, they form the core radical feminist framework against prostitution.

One of the most important philosophical objections to Carole Pateman’s claim about “sexual authority” challenges whether prostitution actually creates authority at all. Critics argue that Pateman may be misdescribing the structure of the transaction.

1. The authority vs. service objection

Philosophers influenced by liberal theory—such as Martha Nussbaum—argue that prostitution is better understood as a service contract, not an authority relationship. Their reasoning: In an authority relationship, one person has the right to command another. In a service contract, the worker agrees to perform specific tasks for payment. Critics say prostitution resembles the second model.

Example: A client may request certain acts. But the worker can refuse, negotiate, or terminate the interaction. So the buyer does not actually possess authority, because the seller retains control over what happens.

2. The symmetry of contract objection

Another criticism is that Pateman assumes the buyer directs the interaction. Critics respond: In many cases, sex workers control the terms. They set prices, define acts, and establish boundaries. So the structure may look more like: customer purchasing a service, not person exercising authority over another. If this is correct, the notion of “sexual authority” might misrepresent the power dynamics.

3. The overgeneralization objection

Critics also say Pateman’s analysis treats prostitution as a single uniform institution, but in reality it varies greatly: independent escorts, brothel workers, street-based sex work, online or cam work. In some of these contexts, workers may have substantial control over the interaction, which weakens the claim that buyers have authority.

4. The deeper philosophical disagreement

The debate ultimately reflects two different views about what contracts involving bodies mean.

Pateman’s position: Some contracts create relations of domination over persons. Selling sexual access gives the buyer a kind of personal authority.

Critics’ position: Contracts sell actions or services, not authority over persons. As long as consent and exit remain possible, authority is not transferred.

So the key dispute is conceptual: Pateman says prostitution transfers temporary sexual authority. Critics say it only transfers a limited service, so the idea of authority is mistaken.