Join 3,512 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Hard Times for Porn (Seriously)
September 29, 2011 11:28 PM   Subscribe

"In the last few years, the rise of free online porn — content-rich sites that tease viewers to subscribe for more — and pay-site juggernauts like Brazzers have put the L.A.-based adult-video industry against the ropes. Its answer, in part, has been the high-dollar parody, designed to attract ComicCon nerds, science fiction fans and other pop culture aficionados who must collect everything within their target oeuvre." -- The troubled US economy affects pornstars too, so "Porn Defends The Money Shot" (NSFW)

"And so many adult actors, particularly the women, are devolving to work as 'escorts,' a kinder term for prostitutes. Former performer Gina Rodriguez says that if the girls last one year in porn movies — most last only three to six months — they get hooked on the relatively big money and gravitate toward prostitution when the film producers seek fresh new faces and bodies.

'It's a money trap,' Rodriguez says. 'They take in the 18-, 19-year-olds, and within a year they'll be into escorting.'"
posted by bardic (80 comments total) 11 users marked this as a favorite

 
If you want to read SFW reviews of these porn parodies, Chris Sims has taken on BATFXXX, Justice League XXX, and Batman XXX
posted by Lovecraft In Brooklyn at 11:31 PM on September 29, 2011


The porn industry has an unparalleled ability to commodify itself.
posted by rhizome at 11:42 PM on September 29, 2011


Well, the high point of researching this was Allie Haze was pretty cute, and a leading contender for replacing Sasha Gray in my books.
posted by Samizdata at 11:50 PM on September 29, 2011


The separation between porn and prostitution already doesn't make any sense to me. You're paying people to have sex. How is that not prostitution? You don't get to just rename "sex" to "acting" and pretend it's something else. I guess legally, somehow you do, but logically, it makes no sense to me.
posted by tylerkaraszewski at 12:01 AM on September 30, 2011 [5 favorites]


You're paying people to have sex. How is that not prostitution?

I once had an acquaintance that worked for a porn site. He explained that the law is that you can't pay someone to have sex with you, but you can pay two people to have sex with each other.
posted by rhizome at 12:03 AM on September 30, 2011


"You're paying people to have sex. How is that not prostitution?"

In 49 states outside of California, legally it is.
posted by bardic at 12:07 AM on September 30, 2011


But arguably, sex between conventional couples is a transaction of sorts -- just in a non-cash form.
posted by bardic at 12:09 AM on September 30, 2011


The story of Brazzers and how disruptive it has been to the porn industry is fascinating. It's more than a pay-site juggernaut - Brazzers owns a number of free, content-rich Tube sites.

For a reality, check, though, Kink.com is another company worth checking out. How to survive in a harsh business environment? Capture the long-tail, and provide unique content catered to very specific audiences.

It's too bad there isn't more serious, quality business reporting done on the porn industry.
posted by KokuRyu at 12:09 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


Let's see...his general arguments seem to be:

Porn stars are willing to fuck anything that moves. He illustrates this by slut shaming the women, despite the fact the last two HIV scares the industry has weathered have come from male performers. (The bit about Princess Leia's body being "obscene" back on page one springs to mind.)

He quotes Nina Hartley, but doesn't mention her very well documented reasons for arguing against condom use, that is, average larger penis size makes it uncomfortable for the men, and the long shooting hours mean constant fricton of rubber on vaginal mucosa actually makes it more likely a performer will wind up with an abrasions that facilitate the transmission of STDs.

He somehow thinks gonzo is the only type of porn to give you an STD (Hint: Any swap of fluid will do that, and plenty of softer flicks have internal pop shot.)

He ignores the fact that there have been two different forms of STI prevention in play within the industry: the mandatory testing/no condoms regime, which has been very successful at preventing STIs, and the compulsory condoms regime, which has had mixed results.

He glosses over the PornoWikileaks affair, which was a seriously big deal. Porn stars are usually contract players, who have to cover their own health costs. Taking away a stigma free avenue for testing is a phenomenal blow to the people working in the industry.
posted by Jilder at 12:11 AM on September 30, 2011 [14 favorites]


I love seeing industries put against the ropes. Is there a porn site for that?
posted by twoleftfeet at 12:12 AM on September 30, 2011 [2 favorites]


You're paying people to have sex. How is that not prostitution?

Porn sex is not like regular sex. It's like any other movie, a careful and artfully constructed fiction. A ten minute scene may have taken two hours to shoot, and like any movie is then edited together to make the finished scene. This is part of the reason why a lot of women in the industry are very strongly against mandated condom use. Eight hours of latex rubbing against your mucosa is a major hazard. They aren't designed for prolonged use, either, and will rupture more readily the longer they've been worn.
posted by Jilder at 12:15 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


That all changed last spring, when a website called PornWikiLeaks put online, for the world to see, performers' medical records, apparently culled from AIM's database and sometimes matched with addresses that are federally required to ensure movie performers aren't underage.

Please tell me there is a porn version of the Assange saga. Full of breathless consent, naturally.

The jokes would write themselves.
posted by Chichibio at 12:15 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


Lovecraft In Brooklyn: "If you want to read SFW reviews of these porn parodies, Chris Sims has taken on BATFXXX, Justice League XXX, and Batman XXX"

The wonderful Fashion It So did the Star Trek one (with a focus on clothes and hair, naturally).
posted by ArmyOfKittens at 12:15 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


The way it's going, there won't be any more porn unless it involves science fiction nerds.

Sorry. I just had to write that sentence out because it seemed so strange.
posted by twoleftfeet at 12:27 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


The sad state of the porn industry is illustrated by banner ads on free porn sites that feature Ron Jeremy pushing penis pills. You kind of wonder what would compel Jeremy to do something like that...
posted by KokuRyu at 12:27 AM on September 30, 2011


Eh, Ron's a hard working lad who'll take any money you throw at him. He's quite unprentious about it too, and any job is a job as far as he's concerned. I'd worry more if it was, say, Evan Stone doing it.
posted by Jilder at 12:29 AM on September 30, 2011


I contemplated reviewing a bunch of these parody porn titles, but the truth is they are largely awful, boring and lame (even compared to regular porn). The exception to the rule is the Batman parody linked above, where everyone involved seemed to be genuinely enjoying themselves and treating the shoot like the gag it was.
posted by stinkycheese at 12:35 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


An... acquaintance... of mine used to be a tout for porn sites as a day job -- hey, somebody's gotta create the free thumbnail galleries for the Hun, et al to link to -- and when asked about why he has slowly gotten out of that gig, he offered the following*:

"There's no money left in straight porn, not where I am. I'm trying to get the conversions, the click throughs, where someone actually signs up, and since there's so much free content out there, I can't make a dime. Doesn't matter if it's extreme, humiliation or anything. Here's the thing -- there is SO much free porn out there to serve all kinds of weirdos, the only place to make money is the kind of shit that if you're into, you wouldn't share with your friends -- grannies and trannies."

So, yeah, KokuRyu... it's down to the (freaky) long tail if you're looking to make any money.


*This is a remembered quote from a couple of years back, so if I've fucked it up, sue me, man... you know who you are.
posted by drfu at 12:39 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


Also, since then "Grannies and trannies" has become my most/least favorite phrase, ever.
posted by drfu at 12:40 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


a Community porn parody is in the works

guess somebody was paying attention to all those AV Club threads objectifying Alison Brie. and Jeff Winger does look sexy, even when he's dead....
posted by Lovecraft In Brooklyn at 12:43 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


I read that last comment as "a Community Weblog porn parody" and almost had my second heart failure.
posted by oneswellfoop at 12:48 AM on September 30, 2011 [3 favorites]


iPud.
posted by Cerulean at 12:53 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


How do you get a Star Wars fuck film past Lucas' lawyers, anyways?
posted by bardic at 1:08 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


I'm just counting down until Michael Eisner discovers hentai and comes down with another case of straight-to-DVD fever.
posted by Mooseli at 1:08 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


But arguably, sex between conventional couples is a transaction of sorts -- just in a non-cash form.

And having sex with anyone younger than you are is pedophilia because youth, the age of consent, and consent itself are all just social constructs.

And not feeding a starving person you could have helped is murder, even if you've never seen that person.

And...

No. Prostitution is paid sex between people who don't otherwise care anything for each other or want anything to do with each other. There surely are some marriages like that, and some guys probably fall in love with prostitutes, but those are exceptions. Prostitutes are girlfriends (and girlfriends are prostitutes) like candy machines are kitchens.
posted by pracowity at 1:13 AM on September 30, 2011 [7 favorites]


How do you get a Star Wars fuck film past Lucas' lawyers, anyways?

These aren't the reels you're looking for...
posted by pracowity at 1:16 AM on September 30, 2011 [5 favorites]


So... when the parody porn performers run out of work and get desperate, then I guess we're going to have fan service?
posted by gracedissolved at 1:27 AM on September 30, 2011


Ron Jeremy pushing penis pills

Weird, the bottle says to swallow them
posted by the noob at 1:32 AM on September 30, 2011 [2 favorites]


New designation recommended: ATSFW (Almost Totally Safe For Work.)

So many NTSW posts are curiously tame for the designation and therefore aggravating, because if it's NSFW, I really want to enjoy it!. Know what I mean?


Just saying . . .
posted by RoseyD at 1:49 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


Hey, it's my day off, I'm disappointed!
posted by RoseyD at 1:54 AM on September 30, 2011


Hey, how about this?

PSFWIYSE

Probably Safe For Work If You're Self-Employed?
posted by RoseyD at 2:00 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


I think numbered NSFW-0 to NSFW-9 would work, where the number corresponds to the nature of your work.

Say NSFW-0 is "Not Safe For Work at the Comstock Presbyterian Preschool For Toddlers With Eidetic memory and Hyper-litigious Helicopter Parents"

NSFW-9 is "Not Safe For Work at the Wilhelm Reich Memorial Fetish Erotica Archive and Orgone Collection Facility".
posted by Grimgrin at 2:05 AM on September 30, 2011 [88 favorites]


I Heart Grimgrin!

Efficient!
posted by RoseyD at 2:09 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


Let's be realistic.

The only things that humans are preprogrammed to care about are sources of energy ("the next meal") and reproduction. We're really just animals.

I shit you not, PETA is launching a porn site. The best way to make anything worthwhile happen is to tap into one or the other, or both, of the only two basic drives.

Then again, that's a damn sexy chicken.
posted by twoleftfeet at 2:15 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


I mean, I ♥ Grimgrin.

Just to be sure . . .
posted by RoseyD at 2:16 AM on September 30, 2011


Please tell me there is a porn version of the Assange saga. Full of breathless consent, naturally.

"Wikifucks", featuring Julian Assbanger.
Coming soon to an adult video channel near you.
posted by acb at 2:17 AM on September 30, 2011 [2 favorites]


Totally PSFWIYSE.

NSFW 5-ish?
posted by RoseyD at 2:19 AM on September 30, 2011


But yes,it's hardly a surprise that the porn industry is going the way of newspaper classifieds. Given the internet's ability for helping people find other people who share their interests, anywhere in the world, without having to go through middle-men, and the abundance of both voyeurs and exhibitionists of every variety, charging for porn didn't stand a chance. (Except perhaps for boutique products; highly specific fetishes for discerning clients and the like.)
posted by acb at 2:20 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


How do you get a Star Wars fuck film past Lucas' lawyers, anyways?

Just promise him it will destroy the franchise and HE'LL pay YOU to produce it.
posted by DU at 2:55 AM on September 30, 2011 [13 favorites]


Jilder: "a careful and artfully constructed fiction"

Seriously?
posted by Red Loop at 3:25 AM on September 30, 2011


add NSFW-A through F and ill be on board
posted by This, of course, alludes to you at 3:26 AM on September 30, 2011


I'd like to see some hard numbers-- how many people have worked in porn since some starting point, how many of those porn actors have contracted stds, how does this compare to the general population.

My suspicion is that working in porn isn't significantly more dangerous than being a non-monogamous sexually active person. There doesn't seem to be an ongoing epidemic of HIV among the actors, and a lot of people whom you pass on the street have herpes.

I'm all for public health initiatives, but it seems like an effort to police porn practices would be not worth the effort allotted, considering the inroads you could make to other facets of public health with that same effort.
posted by Mayor Curley at 3:52 AM on September 30, 2011


How do you get a Star Wars fuck film past Lucas' lawyers, anyways?

The difficult part is actually ensuring he doesn't reissue the film on Blu-Ray with CGI Ewoks, Han Solo and Jar-Jar Binks triple-teaming Princess Leia in a show for Jabba the Hut.

(Unleash your "Han shoots first" jokes now please)
posted by chavenet at 4:05 AM on September 30, 2011 [2 favorites]


Justice League XXX

Worth noting that, based on screenshots, they're using the old-school full-body Harley Quinn costume rather than DC's appalling new one. Hardcore pornography is now dressing Harley in a less salacious costume than DC comics is.
posted by Greg Nog at 4:41 AM on September 30, 2011 [24 favorites]


Star Wars XXX

Fuck, has Lucas gone and made another 24 of those things?
posted by flipper at 4:42 AM on September 30, 2011 [15 favorites]


My suspicion is that working in porn isn't significantly more dangerous than being a non-monogamous sexually active person. There doesn't seem to be an ongoing epidemic of HIV among the actors, and a lot of people whom you pass on the street have herpes.

I'd be curious to see if this is true. Some porn actors also work in the escort business, participation in which carries a higher risk of HIV infection. Generally, there is also a higher level of hard drug use by adult sex workers, which also multiplies the infection rate.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 4:59 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


But arguably, sex between conventional couples is a transaction of sorts -- just in a non-cash form.
posted by bardic at 8:09 AM on September 30


A transaction, possibly. But as long as that "transaction" is based on equality, respect, mutual desire and mutual pleasure I would absolutely reject the use of the term prostitution to describe it and I reject any attempt to blur the boundary between these two distinct things.
posted by Decani at 5:09 AM on September 30, 2011 [2 favorites]


Every few months or so there's a media flurry predicting the death of the porn industry for some reason or other (obscenity laws, NYC mayors, home video, AIDS, cable TV, the internet, bittorrent etc. etc. etc.).

But the porn industry is both resilient and innovative.

What these articles never really explain well is how the porn industry actually makes money, because obviously it does, despite all the "free" material available.

It's like porn has discovered the secret of "3. ???" in the standard Internet business model.

Not surprised, really, that it wants to keep it secret.
posted by chavenet at 5:15 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


Porn stars are usually contract players, who have to cover their own health costs. Taking away a stigma free avenue for testing is a phenomenal blow to the people working in the industry.

ಠ_ಠ

Also, is there some sort of requirement about tone and stock photos to include when writing articles about the porn industry? This could have been a completely professional, tactful discussion of some important issues in a huge industry affecting thousands of people, but since it's about pornography, we get gratuitous nude photos and LOLBLOWJOBSAMIRITE?
posted by Mayor West at 5:29 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


All the free sites depend on getting content from somewhere, so the porn industry is still needed even if no one wants to buy the movies directly. There's clearly huge demand, though it looks like the business models are continuing to shift.

Re: STDs, it isn't at all impossible for porn performers to be at lower risk of HIV, compared to the people in your local bar, thanks to the mandatory testing rules, but simultaneously be at very high risk of things like herpes and HPV, because they aren't screening for those.
posted by Forktine at 5:44 AM on September 30, 2011


How do you get a Star Wars fuck film past Lucas' lawyers, anyways?

Related AskMe. Short answer: parody is fair use, even if it's smutty and for-profit.
posted by valkyryn at 5:45 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


This post is amazing if only for the fact that it introduced me to Jeff Koons's "Made in Heaven" series. That guy is ridiculous.
posted by bloody_bonnie at 5:47 AM on September 30, 2011


"a careful and artfully constructed fiction"

Seriously?


Yes, actually. They have sound guys. They have editing. They use multiple takes to get the best angles, and will intersplice different angles from different takes to give the illusion of a seamless fuck. The seriousness given to it is pretty much in proportion to the money spent on the shoot, so a cheap fuck is going to be done in one take, and a multimillion dollar production will take time and effort to get the best shot. The sex you see on camera in a porn flick is about as real as Bruce Willis defusing a bomn or Robert Pattison living forever. But we have this stupid thing where sex is so animal and base that you can no more fake it that fake an earthquake. This is really quite far from the truth.

Porn stars are usually contract players, who have to cover their own health costs. Taking away a stigma free avenue for testing is a phenomenal blow to the people working in the industry.

ಠ_ಠ


Sorry, I keep forgetting those filthy whores need to be punished for their sins. Seriously, a health clinic where you can walk in and say, "Hey, I'm a porn performer" and not be horribly stigmatised and treated like shit is a huge deal. Being able to have your HIV test results stay private is a big deal. Not being forced to out yourself to your family GP as a sex worker is a big deal. Honesty people.
posted by Jilder at 6:15 AM on September 30, 2011 [7 favorites]


That was a poke at your word choice, Jilder. Hence the bolding of "phenomenal blow."
posted by Etrigan at 6:44 AM on September 30, 2011


acb: "Wikifucks", featuring Julian Assbanger.
Coming soon to an adult video channel near you.


Starring Nick Manning as Julian: "OH YEAH, DROPPIN' WIKILOADS!"
posted by dr_dank at 6:47 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


What these articles never really explain well is how the porn industry actually makes money, because obviously it does, despite all the "free" material available.

An earlier article I read about Brazzers said that (at that time, less than a year ago) the only way to make money these days is with "Cam" content. This is because cams are cheap, user-pay, and guarantee original content that is hard to duplicate, and, even if you do, will be replaced the next day (or the next hour) by more new content.
posted by KokuRyu at 7:53 AM on September 30, 2011


NSFW-9 is "Not Safe For Work at the Wilhelm Reich Memorial Fetish Erotica Archive and Orgone Collection Facility".

I would pay good money to observe a NSFW-9 website. That sounds... illuminating.
posted by FatherDagon at 7:56 AM on September 30, 2011 [1 favorite]


I once had an acquaintance that worked for a porn site. He explained that the law is that you can't pay someone to have sex with you, but you can pay two people to have sex with each other.

What if we do the following:
- Bob pays Charlie $30.
- then Charlie pays Alice $20, and Bob $5. Alice and Bob have sex. Maybe there's a camera turned on and they destroy the tapes immediately afterward.
- now Alice and Bob have had sex. Alice is $20 richer, Charlie is $5 richer, and Bob is $25 poorer.

(All figures for illustration only.)
posted by madcaptenor at 8:05 AM on September 30, 2011 [2 favorites]


He explained that the law is that you can't pay someone to have sex with you, but you can pay two people to have sex with each other.

Does that mean if my friend gets me a prostitute, it's legal?
posted by chundo at 8:27 AM on September 30, 2011 [2 favorites]


What if we do the following:
- Bob pays Charlie $30.
- then Charlie pays Alice $20, and Bob $5. Alice and Bob have sex. Maybe there's a camera turned on and they destroy the tapes immediately afterward.
- now Alice and Bob have had sex. Alice is $20 richer, Charlie is $5 richer, and Bob is $25 poorer.


And Eve got a nice show by spying through an air duct.
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 8:57 AM on September 30, 2011


That hypothetical sounds ripe for a "man-in-the-middle" attack.
posted by hincandenza at 9:36 AM on September 30, 2011 [4 favorites]


Obligatory Family Guy
posted by iotic at 9:47 AM on September 30, 2011


What if we do the following:

A sex brokerage/escrow service! Now it just needs a brand name.

Sexscrow? No — Escrew.
posted by RogerB at 10:02 AM on September 30, 2011 [2 favorites]


I once had an acquaintance that worked for a porn site. He explained that the law is that you can't pay someone to have sex with you, but you can pay two people to have sex with each other.

What if we do the following:
- Bob pays Charlie $30.
- then Charlie pays Alice $20, and Bob $5. Alice and Bob have sex. Maybe there's a camera turned on and they destroy the tapes immediately afterward.
- now Alice and Bob have had sex. Alice is $20 richer, Charlie is $5 richer, and Bob is $25 poorer.

(All figures for illustration only.)


I think that would be called a sham transaction and would not really disguise the fact that Bob paid Alice to have sex with him, but through an intermediary. Except for your little $5 kickback to Bob, Charlies is just a pimp.
posted by Mental Wimp at 10:41 AM on September 30, 2011


"Yes, actually. They have sound guys. They have editing. They use multiple takes to get the best angles, and will intersplice different angles from different takes to give the illusion of a seamless fuck. The seriousness given to it is pretty much in proportion to the money spent on the shoot, so a cheap fuck is going to be done in one take, and a multimillion dollar production will take time and effort to get the best shot. The sex you see on camera in a porn flick is about as real as Bruce Willis defusing a bomn or Robert Pattison living forever. But we have this stupid thing where sex is so animal and base that you can no more fake it that fake an earthquake. This is really quite far from the truth."

One of the most illuminating VHSes I ever ended up with at my former job was from a series called Superfuckers that I picked up mostly for the opening theme song, which sounded pretty much exactly like what you would expect if Cartoon Network aired a hair metal porn parody.

But I don't know if it was supposed to be a DVD and they sandwiched in the extras or what, but each of them would have a scene or series of stills, and then a behind-the-scenes that generally took longer than the scene itself, and it was the least sexy thing possible, especially the set-ups for stills, where you realize that an actor has to hold a pose for sometimes upwards of five minutes with no motion at all. Maybe Sting can do that, but bracing into an inverted jackhammer and then just staying there while grips rotate lights and cameramen try to get close-ups is a phenomenal skill that has absolutely nothing to do with actual sexual prowess.
posted by klangklangston at 11:46 AM on September 30, 2011 [2 favorites]



The story of Brazzers and how disruptive it has been to the porn industry is fascinating. It's more than a pay-site juggernaut - Brazzers owns a number of free, content-rich Tube sites.


One of the accusations leveled at them (it's actually been the subject of lawsuits) is that Brazzers uses the free tube sites to undercut the profits of their competitors.

Also, it's fairly weird to see some of the justifications for not using condoms, such as friction (you can't pause two seconds to squirt in/on some more lube?) and condoms breaking (ditto for replacing a rubber every so often).
posted by Halloween Jack at 12:03 PM on September 30, 2011


it's fairly weird to see some of the justifications for not using condoms

The OSHA discussion at the link I found weird and horrifying. None of those excuses justifications would prevent one from getting booted from any work site I've ever been on. And the idea that an employer would tell OSHA that they've made PPE optional is ludicrous.

Also are polyurethane condoms as irritating as latex?
posted by Mitheral at 12:33 PM on September 30, 2011


You know, there are things that, as a community, we are truly not competent to comment upon, let alone challenge the experts regarding.

I think the relative merits of eight hours of penetration with a condom-covered phallus, vs. one without a condom, is in that category.
posted by effugas at 1:27 PM on September 30, 2011 [4 favorites]


This, of course, alludes to you:

Porn theorists have long believed in the existence of trans numeric NSFW material, also known as "Hyperporn", however to date experimental attempts to synthesize the material under laboratory conditions have resulted in 3 deaths, 21 involuntary psychiatric commitments, 3 best selling novels and 4Chan. Currently there are no ongoing projects to synthesize Hyperporn owing to the crippling insurance and safety requirements as well as local government bans.
posted by Grimgrin at 8:35 PM on September 30, 2011 [4 favorites]


I think the relative merits of eight hours of penetration with a condom-covered phallus, vs. one without a condom, is in that category.

Having read the wear & tear reasoning, I suddenly changed my long-held opinion that porn workers should wear condoms. Experiences of 3+ hours with a partner enduring lifelong Delayed Ejaculation is enough to say "Yes, it does hurt more from friction with condoms over the space of hours." There is not enough lube in the world that will prevent ANY friction from occuring; hours of minor friction add up. By no means am I an expert on that topic, however.

The separation between porn and prostitution already doesn't make any sense to me.

Me either. One's legal and the other's not? Seems pretty arbitrary to me and always has - laws regarding "the worlds oldest profession" are still primarily based on religious moral grounds.

Isn't prostitution legalized and/or regulated in a few other countries? Seriously, this is one of the stupidist criminalizations we have in the US and, like other stupid criminalizations, it just creates more crime, i.e. the blackmarket providing the service in demand. Decriminalization would make prostitution much safer for workers and clients. Regulation & testing, like in the porn industry, should cut the STI transmission rate. (I am still anti-bareback for prostitution, though - you don't know where that client's been before he hired you.)
posted by _paegan_ at 11:12 PM on September 30, 2011


effugas Metafilter membership includes both professional sex workers and, um, lets say ambitious amateurs1, any of whom can probably offer direct empirical experience. It may not be Ph.D. level data (though it wouldn't surprise me if we also had one or two members who could provide that too) but I'd judge them competent.

Also sex workers need a union if they are really expected to work for eight hours straight without so much as a coffee break. It's not legal for a walmart greeter to work those kinds of hours where I live let alone someone engaged in hard physical labour.

Finally I was doubting the friction induced problems of condoms, I was just wondering if a change in materials might make a difference. MAS for sure though it would be an interesting area of study. I'd bet a barrier that more closely mimicked bare backing vis-a-vis friction would feel more enjoyable; at least for some users, professional and recreational.

_paegan_ writes "Isn't prostitution legalized and/or regulated in a few other countries?"

Prostitution is technically legal in Canada. Public solicitation and living off the proceeds of prostitution isn't.

1Of those of us who have been sexually active who hasn't gotten squelchy with a new lover for hours at a time when a relationship is new?
posted by Mitheral at 11:26 PM on September 30, 2011


Prostitution is quite legal in Australia. The biggest drama is zoning laws and people's unwillingness to have brothels near where they live.
posted by bystander at 4:08 AM on October 1, 2011 [1 favorite]



Its answer, in part, has been the high-dollar parody, designed to attract ComicCon nerds, science fiction fans and other pop culture aficionados who must collect everything within their target oeuvre
.

As in Hot Furry Wookie on Ewok Action!!! ? Hmmm.....
posted by y2karl at 2:39 PM on October 1, 2011


Mitheral Corrects "Finally I was wasn't doubting the friction induced problems of condoms,"

Cripes I hate when I do that.
posted by Mitheral at 6:33 AM on October 2, 2011


Adult Video News weights in. Good insider critique of the LA Weekly article.
posted by Jilder at 9:09 PM on October 2, 2011 [1 favorite]


Adult Video News weights in. Good insider critique of the LA Weekly article.

Since both articles have obvious built-in bias, it's nice to have both points of view. Actually, you could closely map each author's biases by carefully analyzing where they use good journalism and where they go off the rails.
posted by Mental Wimp at 9:43 AM on October 3, 2011


Romero also seems to have trouble understanding the fact that—since hetero performers undergo regular STD testing while gay performers generally don't, and the gay porn industry generally has no problem using HIV-positive performers—there's a non-homophobic reason why hetero performers are leery of guys who "cross over" from hetero to do gay porn. So to give any credence to Weinstein's claim that "criticism of crossover performers [is] 'just code' for gay bashing" is just bad reporting.
Wow. Are there really known HIV positive actors working in gay porn?
posted by Mitheral at 5:29 PM on October 3, 2011


Since both articles have obvious built-in bias,

I don't know, the AVN article is only really concerned with investigating the assumptions of the Romero piece, and does a good job of demolishing them.
posted by KokuRyu at 8:54 PM on October 3, 2011


the AVN article is only really concerned with investigating the assumptions of the Romero piece,

I don't know about that, KokuRyu. For example, the quote given by Mitheral above seemed to me to be an unsupported assertion to discredit the allegation that there is antigay bias among straight porn actors. It may be true, but the writer offered no evidence as he criticized his counterpart's reporting. There were a few other examples like that. Of course, the AVN report was shorter, and so had fewer opportunities for lapses.
posted by Mental Wimp at 10:18 PM on October 3, 2011 [1 favorite]


Currently there are no ongoing projects to synthesize Hyperporn
posted by benzenedream at 1:27 AM on October 4, 2011


« Older In October 1870, as American Jews were observing t...  |  The Star Trek Quiet Book,... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments