i read this article about porn stars exploited by the porn industry. http://way2much.wordpress.com/2006/02/27/edit-economically-exploited-porn-stars-dispensable/ makes me think that it is kind of true. they get so little money for porn its nothing compare to what the producers make from it. they get like 500 euros or something, which probably is a lot to them, but is nothing compare to what the producers and the distributors earn. and there are occasionally really cute girls are willing to do even the nastiest scenes, probably because they come from a poor background and they really need the money. that's sad.
Yet many exploited young women earn a six figure income. The lineup will not end anytime soon, I think. If $7 an hour isn't exploitation also, I don't know what is.
Every company exploits there employees. From the NFL to the people picking crops in the fields. The rich are rich for a reason (well most of em) the world has always been based on the little guy breaking his back, while the big man kicks back and reeps the rewards. You wanna talk real exploitation look at those poor chaps at Walmart. LET'S ALL REVOLT AND RUN AMOK, pornstars and all others alike.
I'd imagine there's a little bit more at stake financially with producing and distributing than there is with bending over and opening your butthole for the cam. Just a thought.
[Link]
maniac killa Deactivated User
"Allow me to extend my hand in friendship and shake yo fuckin neck" 82 Posts 10/07
Posted - Nov 19 2007 : 12:00AM
we are all being fucked over by whatever industry we're in. the girls in the industry have it a lot better than normal people working a 9 to 5, now that is being exploited. thats what keeps this country going. lol
This is not really "news." In porn, the profits had always come after the product was produced--so unless the producer had lots of money up front, there was limited money in the overall production budget. And the performer, who is paid up front, does not share in the windfall if the sexvid sells really well. This is why contracts had worked best for performers: they have a set income for the term of the contract. Of course even with a contract the company is making a huge amount of money off of the performer--especially if the company also controls the performer's website. Speaking of which. Websites are the great equalizer. Performers can make an excellent income from a well-run website--which is why so many stars are moving their careers in that direction, and away from working for porn production companies, who produce dvds. In the future my best guess is that although porn girls have be very slow to understand the economics of the biz--and their true worth--they do now. Between personal websites, feature dancing, and work for adult websites like Suze Randall, Earle Miller, and Digital Dreams a performer with smarts can make a lot of money for the 2-5 years she's in the biz. The major difference between being a freelancer in the past vs now is, because of direct access between performer and customers, the performer really can control her own career. In the past, freelancers' careers were controlled by agents and managers--who told them what to do, or they would just send another girl out on jobs. I'm watching both Kayden Kross and Teagan to see how they make the new, post dvd era, business model work for them.
[Link]
sickguy Deactivated User
I'm unofficially Beauty Dior's #1 Fan 736 Posts 9/06
Posted - Nov 19 2007 : 1:18AM
hehehehe.... Hey driedupfish, this is just our friendly way of saying "welcome to the forum"!
Exactly, they are well paid compared to a McLearner learning how to sling fires... There isn't really a male equivilant to that either where can a young dude turn to if he needs quick cash? $1000 is great money for just a few hours work. The porn stars are the entertainment, in my view they are no different the session muscians being hired to perform on the new Madonna/whoever album. Madonna will make shit loads of cash and the session muscian gets $500 to play a bass line. Its business. That's why chicks like Bella are not only sexy, but smart too.
man this post is so riddled with inaccuracies and mistakes, i dont even know where to begin. 1. girls personal websites dont make that much money. any girl making more than 3k a month off her site should be doing cartwheels. 2. suze randall, earle miller, and digital dreams aren't even close to the biggest internet sites out there. are you saying this bc they have solo girl layouts? more people want to see the girls doing boys no? 3. what female performer lasts 5 years in this busines? 2 years is damn near impossible for most. 4. kayden kross does like 2 scenes a month if that. teagan is still a wild card, but we will see. i wont post anything about her future as a courtesy.
Perhaps many porn stars use their appearances in porn films as a kind of publicity that they use to increase their popularity in Strip Clubs and possibly Massage Parlours, which is where they make most of their money. Instead of paying for advertising. These ladies get famous through porn films and get paid for it a little bit too.
christianx you should crosspost that in the "where does the money go" thread
[Link]
benderset Deactivated User
477 Posts 8/06
Posted - Nov 19 2007 : 4:58PM
I heard Melissa Midwest claim the other day in a radio interview that she was making high six figures off her website. She also said she had been offered contracts from Vivid, Wicked, and Club Jenna and turned them down cause she can make more money doing it her way
because the six figure income you can earn in porn beats the hell out of minimum wage. it's a no brainer. yes pornstars can earn a great annual income if they work hard, but does that take away from the fact that they are exploited to a certain degree? no.
and nick manning told howard stern in a radio interview that he was a millionaire. cmon man. you do realize that all websites are split 50/50 with the girl and the webmaster, right? and she might make decent money from her site bc you cant find anything with her naked anywhere else. thats a big difference from the girls in our business.
oh, lol. ditto disneyland and mcdonalds and kfc. that argument doesnt disprove the presence of exploitation. Edited by - ma meeshka on 11/19/2007 8:24:51 PM
[Link]
benderset Deactivated User
477 Posts 8/06
Posted - Nov 19 2007 : 8:31PM
So you dont think its possible Melissa Midwest is making 4 or 5 hundred grand off her website and her video sales?
When consenting adults agree to a business relationship. And one of them gets a bigger benefit out of it than the other. Then some can say that this is exploitation. That's what the Communists said about all such business relationships and tried to abolish them all by force and by law. A lot of people they killed, and a lot of people they sent to jail. But in the end their experiment failed. I see no reason why a Communist approach would work any better with making porn now.
Well, here's how you solve the problem. Get the so called "legitimate" employers to stop exploiting people for minimum wage and just maybe girls won't be so quick to rush to do porn. As long as their only real alternative is standing in a fucking window handing out food to crabby old men or pushing buttons in a Wal Mart for $10 an hour (probably tops), they'll probably take the chance and hit the porn business up for some money for college. You want to talk about exploitation? Go work fast food for a month or two (And I mean 40 hour weeks. Not that part time shit) and see if you don't feel like you've got a ten inch cock rammed up your ass. And you can go buy yourself a Pepsi when you get your paycheck and start counting the days until your next one. I'm not arguing that porn isn't exploitation or even that it's a smart move. But why is it that you only hear grumbling and complaining about exploitation when there's sex involved and it's cute, young college aged girls? I think the answer is obvious. It's not the exploitation that bothers people. It's the sex. Edited by - randomprecision on 11/19/2007 8:54:43 PM
He can sign up for the French Foreign Legion or working on an oil-rig. Two jobs equivalent to porn, no educational achievement required, working at the risk of one's life. The big difference is that the French Foreign Legion and the oil companies pay much better to compensate for the dangerous labor conditions.
I see no reason why porn shall be the last refuge for Manchester Capitalism. I want the porn stars to be compensated for the risks and the stigma that come with this work. Edited by - juha on 11/19/2007 9:14:37 PM
I also would like to see porn stars get better compensation for their work. This would certainly make their profession more attractive for women. And perhaps we would get to enjoy watching many new beauties spread their nice asses for the hard guys. But what I'm against is interference from outsiders in mutually consentual business relationships between porn stars and porn producers. This is something they need to work out between themselves the best they can. It's not our business to judge them and interfere in their business.
benderset, lets do the math. if you think she is making 500,000 a year off her site, thats 40,000 a month. and i just told you that webmasters take half, so she would need to make 80,000 a month total. lets figure 25 bucks a month membership. so thats 3200 members every month. and you figure that retention after the first month drops off considerably, so you need to figure in the fact that i would bet over half would be new each month. thats a shitload of new members each month. lets put it this way, i know for a fact that a major pornstar who only did anal for her website was ecstatic if she had 300 members a month. 3200 members! good lord.
Oh yes, I feel horrible about being "exploited" by handsome, manly strangers with gigantic cocks!!! How awful it is that I get paid for having wild sex with hot, sexy, kinky studs . . . Poor little me . . . If only Walmart would hire me . . . Yes, it is true that I came from a poor background, but my nastiness has nothing to do with cash, honey :-)
[Link]
brewski Deactivated User
208 Posts 6/07
Posted - Nov 20 2007 : 6:53AM
Never heard of Melissa Midwest, so I goes to the site and I see a skinny bland Ripa looking chick doing vanilla sex and it looks like every other porno/el dopo site out there. She might have about 23 customers a month.
The Floating World: Porno News and Events 25 Posts 2/03
Posted - Nov 20 2007 : 8:40AM
Exploitaton? Such a loaded word. We've all (in the US) visited a MacDonalds, Target, Walmart store. It's all a matter of supply and demand. There are a lot of girls who want to work in the industry, and there are a limited number of companies who want to employ them. And those companies are facing slack DVD sales and and an uncertain VOD future. It isn't a conspiracy - it's a market. What's exploitation? An unfair advantage over someone in need? That describes almost every employee in the U.S. Why focus only on women in porn? When that's a tough case, considering that the porn names everyone knows, make six figures a year at least. Maybe if you're so concerned about fairness, you should actually engage in some political action, help create some alternative opportunity in our collapsing Fascist nation.... What have you done about basic education - or even college education funds - for the wandering souls who end up in porn? T.
This accusation of exploitation often comes from people who claim to speak on behalf of sex-workers, even though no sex-workers ever authorized them to speak on their behalf. And such accusations of exploitation are often a prelude to calls for complete prohibition and ban of sex-work. That's the way prostitutes are treated in USA. Nobody ever asks the prostitutes whether they want to work as prostitutes or not. Various lobby groups, police representatives, and politicians claim to speak on behalf of prostitutes, without being authorized by any prostitute to do so. And the end result is that prostitutes are regularly being arrested and thrown in jail, even while all these moral crusaders claim to be helping them. I'm sure there are plenty of such moral crusaders who would like nothing better than to do the same with porn stars.
[Link]
eyeballs a bleeding Deactivated Again
181 Posts 9/07
Posted - Nov 20 2007 : 5:34PM
MMMMM, let's see, young women with no real education getting paid to have sex on camera. Of course they are being exploited. Jeez.
That last statement is just ignorant. Of course in some cases this seems to be a classic case of anybody with money must be evil. I mean read Terri's post. Maybe I'm reading it wrong but it seems like the jist of things is that you are either exploiting or being exploitd which is a vast over simplification at best and a lie at worst.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Nov 21 2007 : 3:04AM
I thought the original point was that porn performers are not getting a fair share of the profit they generate. For example, a mainstream Hollywood film makes A LOT more than a porn film and actors in mainstream films get paid A LOT more per film. But are porn performers being paid the same as a Hollywood actor in proportion to the amount their films make? I think the answer to that is obvious, NO. The difference? Hollywood actors are organized and have a union, porn performers don't, and never, ever will.
[Link]
the unknown pervert Deactivated User
I'd like to stay but I've got a plane to catch. 3243 Posts 5/06
Posted - Nov 21 2007 : 9:36AM
^Mainstream Hollywood actors are on location shooting for weeks and months at a time when making a movie. In porn anything that takes more than two days to film is an epic production. Why shouldn't they get paid more proportionately? They are stuck in that role whether the film takes two weeks to shoot or eight months. You'll never hear Tom Hanks say to Stephen Spielberg "Can we hurry up and wrap this up by noon. I've got a scene in Scorese's film this afternoon and driving across town in traffic is going to be brutal." OTOH it is not uncommon at all for porn performers to double book themselves.
This is exploitation (see De Bella quotes below). Kind of reminds me of the new girls who get pressured to do anal/DPs/etc. on the set (even though they have already said no), and then get "bargained" with after the scene over price (even though they thought they had an agreement before they started). And their "agents" don't do a fucking thing about it (except to deliver the next fresh-off-the-bus hottie to the same predators The fact that they pull this shit with established people like De Bella, and, as I recall with Kami (who just didn't get paid), is what exploitation is all about. And, it's not just the girls. Studios screw over directors too (ex: the recent flap with Brandon Iron not being paid by RLD).
AND
I get a little tired of those who try to poo-poo a real problem with snotty variations on "aw, the poor girl getting paid hundreds/thousands to suck a cock... let 'em work at WalMart" shit. It's not all about the money (although people are screwed over money and stiffed in porn all the time). Try treating the talent with a little fucking respect!
[Link]
eyeballs a bleeding Deactivated Again
181 Posts 9/07
Posted - Nov 21 2007 : 8:59PM
If someone in porn feels that they are being exploited, I believe they do have the choice of walking off the set or walking out of the business. For the most part, (and yes there are exceptions to every rule) any performer going onto a porn set knows exactly why they are there. If they at any point feel they are being exploited, they always have the option of not signing the release and not taking the check. But given my original asertion that the girls doing porn aren't the sharpest tacks in the box, they don't realize they have that option. As far saying that porn performers should share in the profits of a film, get a clue! The performer deserves a piece of the film as soon as they take some risks and pony up some of the upfront costs. The only risk the average performer is taking is catching an STD.
Take it or leave it is not a choice. How about studios/directors just asking the girl to do what they contracted for, without a pressure and threats on the set, and pay them the agreed upon fee when they're done? That could work too, don't you think?
That's why it sucks so bad when the director pulls the shit on them.
I'm betting the release is signed, IDs and current HIV test are checked before the girl ever makes it to actually performing. Checks come after the performance... if they're lucky.
De Bella, Kami and Brandon (my examples) are pretty sharp tacks. De Bella's daughter Jewel is one of the sharpest tacks in the porn business box... yet she took a good screwing from PXP.
You mean like Brandon does when he makes his movies for distribution by others? Only a dull tack would settle for a share of the profits. Haven't you heard, movies never show a profit Sharp tacks (at least in the mainstream film industry) get a percentage of the gross and/or a certain royalty per unit.
I think it's possible to find unfair treatment of workers in any industry, if you look hard enough for such examples. But are these examples exceptions or the rule? That is the question you need to answer before condemning everyone in that industry. I'm sure that in some instances, convicted felons end up as construction site supervisors. And they end up abusing their subordinates, especially when these subordinates happen to be illegal immigrants. But does this mean that the whole construction industry must be condemned as exploitative and unfair? When people break the law in any industry, then the victims are free to complain to the police and the courts. And the porn industry is no different in this regard.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Nov 22 2007 : 2:25AM
I didn't say they should get a piece of the film, just be paid better according to the profit the producer can expect to make on the video. If your logic was extended into every other industry workers would be working for slave labor wages. Unknown pervert makes a good argument when he talks about the different lengths of time mainstream actors spend on a set compared to porn performers. Using examples of some of the worst behavior of performers is a red herring though.
[Link]
eyeballs a bleeding Deactivated Again
181 Posts 9/07
Posted - Nov 22 2007 : 2:51AM
But it's not a mainstream production. It's porn. The mainstream argument should never enter into the discussion. And why should they get a piece of the profits? They did the job they got paid for. I don't hear anyone saying that the porn performer should contribute to the cost of the production if it doesn't make any money. Not every production makes money.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Nov 22 2007 : 3:04AM
I'm not talking points, I'm talking about being paid at a rate equal to the value of your labor. Some may say there is no 'value' in a porn performers labor but since people are willing to pay for DVDs and VOD there is obviously some value in what they do. Especially if the claims that it is a 'multi-billion' dollar industry are true (and I'm not convinced that they are). Of course, today because of the over saturation of the market, the internet and free downloading/theft, a lot of producers aren't making the money they once did but I have trouble feeling too much sympathy for some of them since it seems likely they've been underpaying a lot of performers over the years and got rich doing it. But this is going in circles so I'm going to step out of this thread now.
...the things that were done to me and i couldn't stop it... what do you mean, de bella, you couldn't stop it? somebody had a gun to your head and forced you? people would really say anything to get attention. that makes me laugh when you guys say poor exploited performers, when all of us that said something on this topic, were positive about the situation we have been in in this business. tell me what other job than this one allows a majority of uneducated people to make more money than lawyers. thank you for caring but i think in general we are happy. manuel