"I've found that very few anti-porn feminist or SWERFS actually harbor negative views towards sex workers themselves."
Well, of course that's what they say but try being a sex worker (including sex workers who have been victimized) who questions or challenges their position and see if you still think that . I'm guessing you're not and that's easy to say as somebody from the outside looking in. Also, the Nordic model does go after sex workers by trying to take away their income base and interfering with harm reduction and safety measures. Plus, I disgree with the claim they support sex workers as human beings. They dehumanize sex workers and fail to respect our insight and the complexity of our lives and our narratives as GGG eluded to. Thus, they don't treat us as fully human. They treat us like nothing more than objects to fulfill their victim porn fetishes. They promote victimization, attitudes, policies, and practices that harm sex workers.
"Yes I imagine they view sex workers who challenge their beliefs as negatively as they view non-sex workers who challenge their beliefs."
I disagree. Plus, being a sex worker and non-sex worker isn't the same, so false equivalent. I'm not going to be fooled into believing they care about any sex worker or prostituted woman to use their term. They also put their disdain for customers ahead of the safety and well-being of sex workers. What they've shown they do care about is being able to use our narratives and our lived experiences to promote their anti-sex worker agenda when they can, even if it's in a way that causes further harm to sex workers (or especially if it's in a way that causes further harm to sex workers). It's impossible to support sex workers while trying to destroy our livelihood.
Right, though the SWERFs claim to care so much about survivors, they only care about getting survivors who they can use to promote their position. There are people who survived violence and persecution in the sex industry, yet still see multiple sides to it and recognize the harms of conflating all sex work with violence. These aren't the survivors the SWERFs support, if they support any at all. In fact, they may try to deny their experiences and narratives all together. So much for listening to survivors. As wierd as this sounds, this is one reason I'm glad porn videos I was in are still available online- as proof that I was in fact a sex worker if anybody tries to deny my lived experiences because I don't fit neatly into their agenda. Plus, my web camming site is still up as more proof. Not that I should have to proof myself to any hater, just a way to show how ignorant they are if try to deny my experiences as a sex worker to discredit my voice. Of course, I have many more than are on camera.
I like porn and the Golden Age of Porn 1947 Posts 9/21
Posted - Jul 5 2023 : 3:17PM
But they don't support sex workers or respect them as people. If you don't believe their stories and try to take away their income. You're not supporting sex workers or respecting them. Also, The nordic model for sex work is stupid and makes no sense. If paying for sex is illegal, how do sex workers make money?
Agreed. At best they infantalize and uphold condescending attitudes against sex workers treating us like nothing more than stupid, naive idiots. At worst they promote hatred, disdain, and harmful laws against sex workers, thus promoting and encouraging violence. When you respect somebody, you respect their knowledge, insight, strengths, and consider what they say rather than dismissing or villifying them if they challenge you. However, I try not to dwell too much on what the SWERFs think since when it comes to sex work, they're not the ones who matter. The sex workers are.
As a pro porn feminist, I do understand many of the concerns that anti-porn feminists have, regarding on set abuse, human trafficking, perps working in the industry, etc. These are very real dangers and issues, and they must be remedied and addressed. Some people are surprised to learn that Gail Dines and I know each other and don't hate each other; but none of these ladies acknowledge the presence of pro porn feminists, feminist porn, or even nonviolent couples porn.
To me, the difference between antiporn feminists and antiporn evangelicals is that the former group started off with good intentions, but need to take a deeper look at the full spectrum of today's adult entertainment and those who make it. And they need to realize that we need to work together to fix the problems of the industry, instead of trying to destroy the business and everyone in it. Evangelicals, by and large, are dead set against the sexual liberation of women. I once had a religious leader question my morality because I disagreed with his assertion that women who dress sexily deserve rape. And last year, a fundie threatened me with violence. To me, they are a far greater threat.
Edited by - TheFeministSexpert on 7/5/2023 6:13:15 PM
From the anti-porn feminists I've listened to where I live, I get the impression they are not willing under any circumstances to acknowledge that most porn is benign, but with a fringe of nasty stuff and some abusive people who need to be exposed and rooted out. They'd rather persist with the fiction that it's all violent and abusive, relying on the hope that people will be too embarrassed to contest this ludicrous claim. I think it's because they somehow see any form of commercial sexual entertainment involving women as a serious existential threat to equality.
"As a pro porn feminist, I do understand many of the concerns that anti-porn feminists have, regarding on set abuse, human trafficking, perps working in the industry, etc. These are very real dangers and issues, and they must be remedied and addressed."
Yes, and those are also sex workers' concerns and concerns on the sex work decriminalization side, too. The problem is the SWERFs are interfering with addressing and remedying these abuses by claiming that sex work is by it's nature violent and abusive rather than recognizing these as conditions within the industy to be addressed and remedied. How can we address or remedy these issues if they're just intrinsic to sex work like they claim. With such attitudes, it's not surprising sex workers have reported being told things like "What does it matter if I rape you since you're raped everyday anyway." Proponents of the Nordic model or anybody against sex workers being compensated for their labor may be thrilled to know some aren't since sometimes, people prentending to be customers rob them or force them to give free sexual favors, or police might do this by pretending to be customers and then arresting them or threatening to arrest them if they don't give them free sexual favors.
Also, sex workers have expressed concerns about how broadly human trafficking is being defined and conflations of all prostitution with trafficking, resulting in policies that do more to harm sex workers than stop human trafficking. Case and point, FOSTA/CESTA. That's just one example and there are more. Basically, sex workers are being trafficked into jail cages and subject to major human rights abuses under the guise of fighting trafficking. Look into it for yourselves.
On a topic relevant to this thread, feminist porn is an oxymoron to SWERFs since to them, porn by it's nature is misogynistic and anti-feminist. Plus, I believe they define everybody in porn management such as producers and directors as pimps-to them, thrid parties profitting off the exploitation of women. I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt and think they're at least well-intended. However, this isn't just about intent but effects. Additionally, as a sex worker who has experience dealing with SWERFs, I can say some of them have caused me more trauma and duress than sex work ever has, though I don't engage with them anymore and am over it. I don't let them have that level of power and control over me anymore. So, in this sense they're right that we are victims- victims of their hatred and vitriol. Speaking of self-fulfilling prophesies. If this were just differences of opinion, that would be one thing and everybody has their right to their opinions. However, to me it goes deeper than that.
I had referred to an academic article -- "Porn Work, Feminist Critique, and the Market for Authenticity" by Heather Berg -- before in this thread, but I want to ask if anyone can confirm two things mentioned in it. This was published in 2017, and based on interviews conducted from 2012-2014, so even if they were true at the time, they may no longer be.
First, she said the average rate for a woman in a mainstream production was $800-$1000, while queer and feminist productions paid only $200-$400. Actually the wording of it was a bit ambiguous -- this may be from "queer porn director-producer Courtney Trouble" rather than Berg. Anyway, were these numbers (and the roughly 2-4:1 ratio) true, and are they still true?
Another thing mentioned by Berg was that "the feminist productions I observed were structured around story lines and sex sequences the actors had conceived" (she had personally observed 3 feminist porn productions). This was also confirmed in an interview with Bella Vendetta, "a thirteen-year veteran performer and director in the straight alt porn and BDSM genres," where Bella told Berg about a feminist porn production where Bella had to do her own hair, makeup, and come up with the content of the scene. In other words, feminist porn's authenticity means the performers have to do multiple people's jobs. Can others confirm this, or do they have different experience?
Perhaps, somebody who does both mainstream and feminist porn can best respond, though that may just be anecdotal and based on their personal experiences. Might not be typical. If it's true that mainsteam porn pays better than feminist porn, there can be various explanations. One might be higher budgets. Another may be the types of sex acts. For example, riskier or more explicit sex acts tend to pay higher. For example, double-anal or dp typically pay more than just a b/g vaginal scene or a g/g scene. Also, if performers take on more roles in feminist porn, that might be because they have more autonomy.
I've never heard of porn until after I was done working for production companies and don't consider any of the videos I did at the time to be feminist. However, based on the rates you mentioned, what I typically got was closer to the feminist porn rate than the mainstream rate. Yet, most of the videos I did are over 20 years old.
I like porn and the Golden Age of Porn 1947 Posts 9/21
Posted - Jul 5 2023 : 9:59PM
Every studio is different and most feminist porn studios are small with very few resources. Some like Lust Cinema are more like a Hollywood production with hair and makeup people, then you have small studios like Crashpad, who pay around that much and I believe you do your own makeup and hair.
Did Lust Cinema even exist between 2012 to 2014 when the interviews were conducted? I think there are new feminist production studios and websites since then and it seems like more continually emerging.
Yes, I agree. The way that I explain it to them is this: the term pornography, by definition, refers to a depiction of sexual activity. It is neither good or bad at its root, it's always what the content creator does with the concept. Recently I saw a New Sensations title in which Tyler Nixon played a besotted young man planning to propose to his girlfriend. He tries to come up with creative ways of presenting her with the ring, including baking it into a cupcake. He ends up losing the ring, and finally it turns up somehow in her laundry basket. She accepts the proposal--and as the couple makes love, he asks her, "What is your favorite way to make love? I'll do whatever you like." I also saw a fabulous romantic comedy, Shoot Your Shot, from Team Skeet. Starring Nicky Rebel and Penelope Kay, it's a funny, touching and empowering love story.
At the other end of the spectrum, I recently saw advertised an anthology of short films that showed fictionalized accounts of women being raped and murdered. And even worse, we do have real-life preds in the industry and they need to go.
As you said, most porn is benign--the typical tape is a collection of sex scenes with a little dialogue thrown in for good measure. So if people really want to help and support women in the industry, they need to let them do their jobs, while being there to champion them if they are abused, underpaid, etc. This is true of any job.
Erika has been directing since 2004, and Angie Rowntree from Sssh (a company for whom I work very proudly) started at around the same time. Playgirl started making films in 2005. So yes, this study does not seem to be comprehensive in its sources.
The issue of rape scenes came up, so I'm wondering if they can ever be feminist, such as rape fantasy. To me, the difference between rape fantasy and actual rape is that women (and it is women being raped in rape fantasy scenes from my understanding) are in control of their fantasies whereas whereas in actual rape the victim isn't in control. In the obscenity case against Rob Black, at least one of the videos targeted was about a serial rapist and murderer. Another scene targeted was about a female reporter during the Iraq War raped by I believe Al Queda. Yet, I saw him in a documentary saying that wasn't his film, though he praised the concept. I can speak for whether it was or wasn't, just what I heard and read. Point is this is topic is treading on murky waters in terms of law. If rape fantasy can be feminist, that doesn't mean all rape scenes are and it can depend on the context.
This also gets me thinking about the movie called "Perspectives," a porn film about a woman struggling to leave an abusive marriage who is finally able to with the help of a support group. This movie dealt with domestic violence as a serious issue instead of fetishizing it or treating it like nothing more than a fantasy.
Also thinking about a scene I saw while visiting the Erotic Heritage Museum in Las Vegas years ago. They had this booth upstairs set up like a classic peepshow where they scene one movie after another. One of the scenes featured a group of Black guys in a car kidnapping and raping a White woman walking down the street and they took her to some place. Does anybody know what scene this is? It was an older scene I think from the 70s and the title may have been something like "Hot Night in the City?"
I was thinking about how this reflects and promotes racist stereotypes of Black guys being dangerous and threats to helpless White women in need of protection. There weren't many people in the museum and the only other guest I remember at the time was a White guy who was also watching the scene. This was years ago so I don't remember the exact interaction, but from what I remember is he asked why I didn't like it and he said he found it hot. Months later at another event, I spoke with the curator at the time (who is no longer there) and she said that though she recognizes people may have concerns, she perceived this as nothing more than a fantasy and mentioned how she shared this fantasy, and another White woman listening to the discussion agreed. Yet, the curator said she didn't personally select this film and that they subscribe to a company that provides thousands of scenes. Not sure if they still use that service or show that film.
I like porn and the Golden Age of Porn 1947 Posts 9/21
Posted - Jul 6 2023 : 11:17AM
I believe Paulita Pappei's scene for Hardwerk is that I think it's like a rape/revenge film. But it's been banned from the site because of credit card companies
I like porn and the Golden Age of Porn 1947 Posts 9/21
Posted - Jul 6 2023 : 11:34AM
"Perspectives" is one of my favorite Angela White films. I watched " Hot Summer In The City" last year for the first time. God, That movie was bad, everything in that was bad, the acting, the sex, the setting, the story. Here's a little backstory on the movie from Gail Palmer Hot Summer in the City
^Oh, so that's what the movie was called. My guess was close and I got the decade right. Thanks for sharing this and am reading the backstory. I didn't watch the whole movie, just the part where the guys kidnapped and brought her to some place to rape her. Didn't get through the rape scene or know there was a plot beyond that. I had no idea one of the producers or directors who also wrote the movie was a woman (Gail Palmer) who I haven't heard of until now. Also interesting how her boyfriend at the time, Harry Mohney, was the other producer or director. He owns the Erotic Heritage Museum in Las Vegas, so I now wonder even more if this video being shown in the peekshow booth is just coincidence and included with thousands of other videos from another company as the former curator said. I didn't know who Harry Mohney was when I first visited the museum, though I later learned he also owns the Deja Vu chain of strip clubs. The location of the EHM used to be a Deja Vu location and there still is one nextdoor. I haven't heard great things about Deja Vu from dancers, yet maybe different dancers have different perspectives and it might depend on the club. Though I was a dancer, I never worked at Deja Vu and cannot speak about that place from experience.
Noticed the poster on the link you send. One word reaction: Yikes!
Lower budget was certainly the key reason, as the paper stated that feminist porn productions were "far less lucrative than mainstream ones." The $800-$1000 figure was not inflated by more demanding sex acts. Berg stated that the rate for anal scene was $1200, and she talked to the owner of Girlfriends Films who told her their g/g scenes paid $800 which was considered an "above-market" figure for g/g scenes, so the $800-$1000 figure certainly was for regular b/g scenes. In fact, the $200-$400 figure may be comparatively an artificially "held-down" figure in some sense, as she also stated that, "Most queer and feminist directors use a flat-rate structure, avoiding mainstream's pay hierarchies according to gender, race, appearance, and sex act."
Your point about autonomy is certainly correct. The point Berg was trying to make was that there was a very strong, arguably necessary, connection between autonomy/authentic sex and having to do multiple jobs (writer, director, and potentially makeup artists) for one (low) pay. In Berg's words, "It is not so much that authentic scenes are less produced, then, as that the labor of their production is both concealed and concentrated with performers." I'm just interested in knowing if this continues to be the case today.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by not comprehensive? The author did not mention those specific names, so it is possible she did not interview those specific people. However, she conducted interview with 59 current and former performers and 22 nonperforming personnel, in addition to personally attending multiple production sets and trade shows. I'm reasonably confident that she's correct in describing the conditions ~10 years ago.
^^I'm reading the study you're referring to and the statement that feminist porn typically pays performers $200 to $400 per scene while mainstream typically pays $800 to $1000 came from one person, Courtney Trouble. Though she is very experienced in the industry as a performer, director, and producer, this was presented as just one person's perspective and cannot be generalized to the whole industry, though some other people also mentioned feminist porn paying lower on average This isn't the same as doing statistical research comparing survey results from multiple performers on pay differences between feminist and mainstream porn. Interesting study though and thanks for mentioning it.
Also, I didn't notice anything in the article negating how pay differentials can connect with the types of sex acts. For example, the article did mention mainstream porn typically pays $1200 for anal scenes, though I don't remember if Heather Berg mentioned the source of that. Yet, there's no comparison between pay for anal sex in mainstream porn and anal sex in feminist porn. Anal sex is more rare in feminist porn and I don't know of sex acts that pay even higher such as dp or double anal in feminist porn. Thus, I don't know how we can rule out the type of sex acts as one possible explanation for the pay differences. It looks like there is probably more than one reason for these differences if there are such pay differences overall.
More recently, Heather Berg wrote a book titled "Porn Work" which might be based in the research you mentioned:https://flexpub.com/preview/porn-work
I'm sure she is a good researcher and she brought up interesting things in the report--no offense intended. I'm sure that she's telling the truth about one segment or corner of the femme porn industry. But if she didn't interview Angie, Erika, Kelly Holland, then she did not survey the queens of the femme porn empire--for instance, Angie directed a scifi film, Invictus, that had such great production values that its edited R-rated version won the Award of Prestige for Best Scif-Fi film at the Vegas Movie Awards and received an honorable mention in the category for Best Indie Feature. Candida Royalle directed films 1984 to 2007, and released them through Adam and Eve. Her casts were filled with top stars from that time, including Rhonda Jo Petty, Jerry Butler, Jeanna Fine, Mark Davis, Jill Kelly, etc. PlaygirlTV was on the air from the early to mid 2000s, and our DVDs won several AVN awards.
I do agree that women and couples need to come out and support indie femme porn content creators, to ensure we keep the good stuff coming!
My friend Hyapatia Lee worked with and truly admired Gail Palmer, but not in Hot Summer in the City. Hyapatia refused to appear in rape scenes and actually wrote and appeared in a version of The Canterbury Tales that removed all the rape from the story--no mean feat, that! She said that Gail was planning to move in to feminist porn but never got the chance to--she did edit the rerelease of Sly Stallone's softcore porn--if you search the term Gail Palmer Sylvester Stallone on YouTube, you'll see the hilarious trailer featuring Gail, who was also quite beautiful.
Can rape porn be feminist? In my opinion, no, no more than any form of heinous abuse against women and girls (from domestic battery to child abuse to sexual harassment) can be successfully translated into feminist porn. The only successful translation of similar principles I saw was the film Taken, directed by Veronica Hart, in which Evan Stone's character kidnaps Ginger Lynn's character, an unhappy housewife named Kim, and takes her back to his palatial mansion. It qualifies as feminist porn because the following conditions are present: 1. Spoiler alert! Ginger's character is dreaming. Her kidnapping experience is a fantasy, and this plot element is hinted at throughout the story. 2. When Evan's character takes Kim back to his home, he assures her that he will not rape her--his aim is to seduce and romance her until she comes to him willingly. She can leave when her fantasies are fulfilled. The couple falls in love, and she weeps when she awakens--only to meet the inspiration for her dream lover in real life and under consensual circumstances.
Personally, I don't know of a single woman who enjoys violent rape porn, such as that produced by Extreme Associates. When they do claim to like rape porn, they're generally thinking of works like Fifty Shades of Grey or Rudolph Valentino's The Sheik (I actually love Valentino); both of which seem to be created for audiences of women who are afraid to express their desires and needs--so even in fantasies, they have to pretend that they're being forced in order to enjoy sex. This needs to change.
For additional reading: https://www.sexpert.com/sexual-assault-awareness-month-why-i-just-cant-support-rape-porn-and-erotica/
Edited by - TheFeministSexpert on 7/6/2023 4:03:25 PM
The study by Heather Berg also quoted Ana Foxxx saying she got $5000 for an anal scene because she held off on doing anal and wouldn't when she started. This gets me thinking about something Rocco Reed said on camera; which is that in porn, if a woman says she doesn't do something, the interpretation isn't that she doesn't do it, but that she doesn't do it yet. Thus, when she finally does do it, she and her agent (if she has one) can get more money and production companies can advertise this as a selling point. Rocco Reed was a pornstar who now speaks out against porn and became a Christian minister. Though I don't generally agree with his ideologies on porn, the comment above makes sense factually based on what I know of how porn works. That might be another difference between feminist in mainstream porn. In feminist porn, if a woman says she doesn't do something, that may be considered more final. Like, there isn't as much focus on "when will she change her mind, how much money can we give her to change her mind and do it, and how much can we bank on it" nor does there seem to be the anticipation among fans about when will she do anal or whatever.
The fault is mine. I think I have glossed over the term "feminist porn" here. What Berg means by it is not really what you mean by it. You have no problem including "mainstream" productions into this category (for example, you cited a Team Skeet production earlier in a positive way), something that I agree with. Berg seems to define "feminist porn" as something opposite to "mainstream porn." She seems to mean by it as something that has arisen at least in part as a response to certain feminist critique against porn, something that emphasizes "authenticity" as opposed to commercial, inauthentic content, such as perhaps Crash Pad. She is engaging in a dialogue/debate against a dichotomy that has been set up by some others: mainstream commercial/directed/inauthentic porn vs. feminist/DIY/authentic porn. Pardon the lengthy quotation, but I'll let Berg explain it in her own opening two paragraphs (funny how she also mentions Gail Dines like you did):
**********************************
"Porn: A Multibillion-Dollar Industry That Renders All Authentic Desire Plastic." This is how antiporn feminist Gail Dines describes the porn industry. Dines points to a central tenant of antiporn feminism - that authentic sexuality is antithetical to market-based sexuality. This rests on the assumptions that there is such a thing as authentic sexuality and that authenticity is necessarily a social and political good. Investments in authenticity loom large in the story of the feminist "sex wars"... shaping the conversation about the pleasures and risks of sexual performance (commercial and otherwise). Antiporn feminists have so successfully set the terms of these debates, I argue, that their fundamental assumptions about the value of authenticity populate the narratives of those who make porn, even (and perhaps especially) feminist pornographers.
Thus, in her piece in The Feminist Porn Book, "porn star, writer, social worker, performance artist, and self-professed gender and sexuality geek" Dylan Ryan describes authenticity's central role in feminist porn. As she and director Shine Louise Houston envisioned what would become the first film in the Crash Pad Series, "'authenticity' took on a somewhat mythological quality and became the Holy Grail in our vision of pornographic filmmaking: "if we could achieve it, we truly would have transcended the existing constraints of the known porn world." Authenticity has the status of a Holy Grail throughout the feminist porn community, and, as I will show, across even those porn genres that have not emerged in response to feminist critique.
Berg did not mention any studio names, but she did quote from multiple persons. She said her interviews (more than 80 of them) lasted 45 minutes to 2 hours each. Needless to say, most of those material do not appear in a direct form in the paper. But below are the names (along with the epithet Berg uses for them) that do appear and are quoted:
- Mike South; a straight gonzo director; interview with the author, conducted via Skype, 2014. - Farrell Timlake; owner of amateur porn distributor Homegrown Video; phone interview with the author, 2014 - Courtney Trouble; queer porn director-producer; interview with the author, Emeryville, CA, 2014 - Lorelei Lee; performer; interview with the author, San Francisco, 2014 - Anonymous; producer/director, interview with the author, Los Angeles, 2014 - Dan O'Connell; president of girl-girl mainstream studio Girlfriends Films; phone interview with the author, 2014 - Stoya; performer; interview with the author, Woodland Hills, CA, 2014 - Bella Vendetta; veteran performer and director in the straight alt porn and BDSM genres; phone interview with the author, 2014 - Alex Linko; Gonzo performer/director/cameraman; interview with the author, Los Angeles, 2013 - Siouxsie Q, a sex work activist, writer, and performer in feminist porn; interview with the author, Oakland, CA, 2014 - Conner Habib; gay performer; interview with the author Los Angeles, 2014 - Danny Wylde; performer; interview with the author, Los Angeles, 2014 - Maxine Holloway; performer and sex work activist; interview with the author, San Francisco, 2014 - Ela Darling; performer; interview with the author, Los Angeles, 2014 - Herschel Savage; performer; interview with the author, Los Angeles, 2013 - VJ; a retired performer who worked in atypically rough scenes; phone interview with the author, 2013 - Ana Foxxx; a performer in mainstream straight films; interview with the author, Los Angeles, 2014 - Tara Holiday; performer; phone interview with the author, 2014
You are certainly correct that this study is not quantitative and the numbers cannot be taken uncritically. Still, it's quite plausible that there are certain baseline/average numbers that are widely known and accepted within the industry. There are also certain "bracket numbers" that make the $800-$1000 number plausible (the $800 for g/g scene, the $1200 for anal).
As for the feminist porn number, it must be pointed out that this has to do with what Berg means by "feminist porn," which is not necessarily what you or I mean by it. I refer you to the opening paragraphs of her paper (and my earlier reply to TheFeministSexpert). Also, note that Berg has stated that feminist porn producers (those by her definition, at least) do not use a pay scale that differentiates among sex acts.
Right, though even if feminist porn producers don't differentiate pay based on sex acts and mainstream does, that might still at least in part explain the pay differential since feminist porn doesn't feature as much of the riskier sex acts that can garner more pay in mainstream porn.
I know nothing of the specific movies you mentioned, but since you brought up this business of a man kidnapping a woman, I wonder if you have watched a youtube video called Abduction As Romance It's a really well produced 20 minutes video with more than 2 million views. It talks about this phenomenon within non-porn, mainstream movies, and just how ludicrous and horrifying this concept is. A very sobering thought to be kept in mind is that the first film this video talks about is a big budget film that came out in 2016. Twenty effing sixteen.
Exactly. It's too easy to get drawn into this false binary of anti/pro, but it makes sense for sex workers to defend their right to work. Any discussion of concerns and problems will be used to advance anti-SW policy and fuel antiporn attitudes. Lorelei Lee has a fantastic article addressing just this--"Cash/Consent"--wherein they argue that anti-trafficking and anti-porn activism/policy makes it impossible for sex workers to speak openly about their work and therefore makes their work more dangerous.
This is an interesting point. On one hand, it's certainly rude at best and unethical at worst for either producers or "fans" to pressure performers to do something they don't want to do. On the other hand, as this is sex work, there's surely nothing inherently wrong with negotiating a higher wage for some specific sex acts, and negotiation, by definition, is a two-way street. If some producer takes the stance that they will not pay any more regardless of the work involved, it seems there's also nothing particularly feminist about it.
I, too, am horrified by this trend--and the success of productions like 365 Days, in which a woman is drugged and abducted by the 'hero'--truly repulses me. It seems an attempt to drive women back into the closet sexually, like we can't celebrate our own sexual agency, and--far more seriously--to glamorize abuse.
Hyapatia Lee's version of The Canterbury Tales, mentioned above, must be about the only case of a porn adaptation from the classics that bowdlerised and prettified the original source material. And a good job too, whatever problems we have today we can be grateful not to be living in the Middle Ages. Loved the caption at the start, that it was 'based on the novel by Geoffrey Chaucer'. Enjoyed a softcore feature, Virgins Of Sherwood Forest directed by Sybil Richards, in which a woman dreamt she was back in the Robin Hood era. All the women wore thongs under their costume and had tans and enhanced boobs, including the one playing the Sherriff's evil sister, the incongruity of which I loved, while the male cast would appeal to women.
Gloria Leonard wrote an editorial in an early High Society mentioning the inclusion of more overtly sexual material in the likes of Cosmopolitan and suggesting that adult product in the future would increasingly appeal to both sexes. This seemed likely at the time, and the memoirs of Xaviera Hollander and the like were very popular. Leonard's spoofy pictorials in High Society were also designed to appeal to a mixed audience, though it later became just another porn mag aimed at men. I admired her for her forthright stand against censorship, and for her gutsy entrepreneurial spirit in instituting phone sex, not something that has ever appealed to me, any more than male strippers, but I'm for anything that extends sensual pleasure and choice for adults.
Did she also point out how men stripping for female audiences wasn't nearly as common as vice versa? Like, the vast majority of strip clubs feature women dancing for male audiences. I'll go out on a limb and say most strip clubs featuring male dancers are geared toward male audiences. An exception is La Bare. Also, in terms of her saying straight porn is naturally "sexist and unaccepatble," the late Andrea Dworkin took this a step further in her book titled "Intercourse" by calling all heterosexual sex rape. While she got much criticism for writing that, at least she wasn't being hypocritcal on this issue and her position was consistent across the board. Though she was very anti-porn, she wasn't just targeting porn in that statement.
Tessa. This was a woman sitting opposite to me on a long train journey. We got talking and had quite a bit in common. There was controversy in the news about a dinner for business leaders waited on by women in skimpy attire which brought from her a long rant about 'objectification' porn and the sex industry, which she said was wholly concerned with women providing a service for men. Hence my question re male strippers. I said that commercial sex entertainment had its dark side but in my view, was mostly harmless, and that a lot of women involved enjoyed the work, to which she replied respectively that I must be very naive and 'don't get me started about them'. Got the impression that she didn't really care about the women concerned, more that they were letting the side down. Didn't get the idea she'd go anywhere as far as Dworkin whom, as you point out, at least had the benefit of consistency.
I like porn and the Golden Age of Porn 1947 Posts 9/21
Posted - Jul 20 2023 : 11:31PM
[tweet=[Tweet is no longer available]
Has anybody seen this early 00s feminist/queer porn movie called Sugar High Glitter City that come out in 2001? I guess it's the classic film San Francisco PornFilmFestival will be showing for the weekend. Also, this is another plug for the festival. Please, sign up or get tickets and come watch some independent feminist porn.
The same person also interviewed me at AVN and I appear briefly in the video linked to above. Enjoyed the interview and found him to be respectful. He listened and didn't interupt. He didn't ask me that same question. Might be because he interviewed me sometime after he interviewed Abella Danger and may have stopped asking that question after her reaction or because I was steering the interview towards sex workers' right issues.
Looking at that the interviewers' other videos (and his seriously suspect associations) it's clear he's at least part edgelord/troll with a disarming veneer of politeness The comment section - which is pretty trash - seems to bear this out.
Not sure if he's a troll (haven't heard the term "edgelord" though I can guess what it means). I also read the comments section and there's so much negativity toward her and praise toward him. So, you may be right about that. Also noticed her name is in the subject line of the video and the video begins with her "going off," so he can use this as click bait and to keep viewers tuned in after they click onto the video. Maybe it's working because when I last checked, the video had over half a million views. Haven't seen the interviewer's other videos besides the AVN ones. The main reason these videos caught my attention is because I remember speaking with him.
I posted comments supporting of her in the "Comments" section of the video. At first, they were deleted probably because I linked to the blog entry I linked to on here. Maybe, his channel doesn't allow links to other places. Then, I posted comments without sharing this link and they're still up. If anybody else wishes to comment there, just be sure to set up a YouTube account first if you don't already have one. It's free to set up. We need an account on there not only to post videos, but also to post in the "Comments" section of videos.
Abella Danger is much younger than I am and didn't enter the biz until later, and I've never met her. However, I've seen other interviews with her and was impressed. She seems very insightful and like a woman with much depth. Thus, it's understandable why she prefers questions that bring out this side of her. In other interviews, she speaks very passionately about topics- such as feminism, being on the debate team in college, and Ruth Bader Ginsberg.
I like porn and the Golden Age of Porn 1947 Posts 9/21
Posted - Aug 26 2023 : 2:30PM
I skimmed through most of the interviews and I agree this dude's questions aren't really that good. Asking questions about "porn addiction" and "What do your parents think of you doing porn" it looks like he only asked that question to the women. Also, he asked a really cringey one like "Would you have sex with a step-parent", fucking gross dude. He just sounds like another stupid "edgelord" podcast/comedian. I wish pornstars would stop doing interviews with jackass comedians, podcasters, and sportscasters who don't know or respect the industry and look at your career as a joke.
Right, being performers doesn't qualify us to speak for other people's addictions. Abella Danger responded to that question very well. He said the questions weren't negative, though porn addictions seem negative to me and asking performers to speak on this when they aren't qualified to can put them on the defensive as if they're being blamed for this. He also asked me questions about the effects of porn on mental health and I responded that I cannot speak for other people's mental health. He was understanding. He didn't ask me about sexual relations with a step-parent or my reaction if my adult child were to express an interest in being a porn performer, though I've been asked multiple times about step- role plays when live camming so I'm used to those types of questions. That stuff has become mainsteam in porn, which could be why he asked about it. However, it can be different when asking about this in real life.Edited by - Tessa on 8/26/2023 4:13:55 PM
