Category Archives: Porn industry conditions

QotD: “only women seem to have this magical ability to reclaim our power and our bodies by giving men the exact thing that they want from us”

Y’all ever notice how only women are given the line that if we allow more men to buy our bodies for sex, we’re actually gaining our power back from men. that line wouldn’t work or make sense with any other type of capitalist exploitation. you’d never hear a leftist say that a retail worker dedicating even MORE of their life and their time to their capitalist boss is “taking back their power” or a sweatshop worker being worked to death by a capitalist company is “reclaiming their bodies” — only women seem to have this magical ability to reclaim our power and our bodies by giving men the exact thing that they want from us.

Coasspellmans

QotD: “It’s funny ‘cause he thinks it’ll be the same as movie actors being wacky and messing up their lines, while in actuality it would be women having mental breakdowns on set”

From tumblr

QotD: “Coerced sex is as ubiquitous as you’d expect it to be”

Former (for now, hopefully permanent) stripper here. I think a lot of people who don’t have first hand experience of stripping don’t understand that the job is about %10 actual dancing at most. There are some regional differences, club differences, I know girls get tipped more in places like Vegas or Atlanta but if you go just about anywhere else, you do NOT make your money dancing on stage. Stripping is not just being some hot and unattainable things gliding around a pole while awestruck men make it rain.

The majority of your money comes from private dances and from tips. If you are in the industry you know that the best way to ensure your income is to gather regular clients. There are two ways to do this: you can either give them sexual favors or you can play along with their fantasy that you are their girlfriend/will meet them outside the club. Both are objectifying and degrading, not fun. Not sexy.

Aside from having to deal with regular clients, stripping means swimming in a sea of misogynistic assholes. Some men get off on hurting women physically, some men get off on making women cry. You could be a 10/10 and you will still be subjected to abusive treatment by men. No matter how hot you are, there is always some man who feels entitled to list all the “flaws” he sees in your body to put you in your place. Stripping means existing every day in an atmosphere of violence and sexual aggression and having to constantly fend off men who repeatedly try to violate your boundaries.

As rude and entitled as the customers might be, they are nowhere near as bad as club owners/managers can be. Coerced sex is as ubiquitous as you’d expect it to be. Managers can force you to work back to back shifts until you drop or develop a coke habit (so you can buy from them), they can force you to give dances to men that smell like piss and they can retaliate against you if you piss off the wrong client by refusing to fuck. I’ve been called a cunt, a bitch, a whore, literally any insult you can think of – and I was Top Earner for almost a year straight. And I put up with it because I couldn’t afford to stand up for myself and lose my job.

And when i’m saying this, keep in mind I worked in the most expensive, “high-end” club in a major metropolitan city for years. I was one of the hot, “lucky” ones. This is the high end. On the low end you’ve got clubs that are actual no-bones-about-it-lube-in-the-goddamn-sanitizer-bottles brothels filled with trafficked women from Eastern Europe and Asia.

I’m sure some strippers are gonna say it’s not degrading yadda yadda, “I’m empowered!” But I’ve never met a stripper who hasn’t had some sort of emotional breakdown on a shift at least once, and that kind of says something.

The privileged sex worker tourists looking to gain some sort of dangerous mystique/male validation/”self-discovery”/whatever the fuck supplemental identity might never experience this, but who cares about them anyway, they are a joke to the rest of us.

tl; dr – take it from a stripper, it is degrading. What I wrote above is pretty stream of consciousness so i’m sorry if it seems unpolished. I just get scared and frustrated when I see things like this and wanted to get this out of my system so I could go take a bath and chill.

Tennismilk

I quit stripping not long after I started because I had an anxiety attack (I didn’t know what an anxiety attack was back then). I was lucky enough that I could quit because I could find money elsewhere and hadn’t been there long enough to get stuck. Not long after that the club got shut down for prostitution.

I assure you, everything she said above is true. The owner/manager is an abusive pimp, the girls are doped up just to get through the night, men try to take advantage of you at every turn, it’s a nightmare.

You know what my appeal was? That I had just turned 18 and was a virgin (I wasn’t a virgin, but that was my gimmick). You know who all of my regular clients were? Men old enough to be my dad or, more often, grandfather, trying to get me to suck their dick for extra cash. They’d try to get my drunk enough to do it, but all my “rum and coke”s were just soda.

Girls who needed more cash or drugs could fuck the boss for it. He would pay us to get a tattoo of the club’s name and logo. There all still girls out there with it permanently on them even though now the club is gone, always reminding them of what went on in there.

This isn’t some sexy emporium of pleasure, it was a stock yard and we were cattle, branded and caged, for men to buy.

Itisthefunpolice

QotD: “Porn site to pay $12.7m to women who didn’t know videos would be posted”

A US judge has awarded $13m in damages to 22 women who were defrauded by the owners of GirlsDoPorn, a website specialising in “amateur”-style pornography.

The women were coerced and tricked into making pornography that was released on to some of the biggest adult sites in the world without their consent, leaving some of them suicidal.

The San Diego superior court heard evidence from the women, Jane Does 1 to 22, in a case their lawyers say has “exposed the rotten underbelly of the San Diego sex industry”.

GirlsDoPorn is an adult subscription service launched in 2006 by New Zealander Michael Pratt and operated by Ruben Garcia and Matthew Wolfe. Filmed in homes, hotels and trailer parks, videos on GirlsDoPorn specialise in promoting the image of the “ordinary” college girl who is making her first and only pornographic film.

The women told the court they had replied to ads on Craigslist asking for “beautiful college-type preppy girls” aged 18 to 22 interested in modelling.

After applying for the modelling work, they received phone calls from other women who have been described as a key part of the business – “reference women” who pitched the idea of making porn and assured them that it would never go online.

The women all said they were pressured into taking part. Those who tried to back out once it was clear what was involved were threatened, plied with alcohol and told they would have to pay for their own way home from San Diego.

They were promised that the footage would go straight to DVD for wealthy buyers in other countries, in particular Australia and New Zealand, where the defendants come from.

The videos were in fact uploaded to some of the most used adult sites in the world and have been viewed more than a billion times. Anonymous emails were sent to their families, universities and friends, linking them to the videos.

In her evidence, Jane Doe 1, who was studying law when the videos were released and seen by fellow students, family and friends, said: “I felt ripped apart, piece by piece. Honestly I wanted to commit suicide when it all came out … I tried moving away. I have tried going places people don’t know me and it just follows me everywhere.

“I’m always paranoid when I meet new people that they have seen my video or [when I] meet new people [they] are going to say, ‘I know you.’”

Judge Kevin Enright described in his findings how the need to keep finding young women new to the porn industry drove the “deceptive, coercive and threatening behaviour” used by the defendants.

He said: “Subscribers [to GirlsDoPorn] are meant to be left with the impression that the women in [the] videos are everyday women that they could encounter in their communities, campuses and daily lives.

“In accordance with this ‘one time only’ paradigm … business is dependent on recruiting a constant stream of new models. The court finds … that fraudulent practices [were used] to facilitate such recruitment.”

After the films were released details of the women were published on WikiPorn.

Enright said: “Defendants’ tactics have caused the videos to become common knowledge in [the women’s] communities and among their relations and peers – the very thing that [they] feared and that defendants expressly assured them would not happen.

“Collectively, they have experienced severe harassment, emotional and psychological trauma, and reputational harm; lost jobs, academic and professional opportunities, and family and personal relationships. They have become pariahs in their communities. Several plaintiffs have become suicidal.”

[…]

During the course of the civil trial, Pratt, Garcia and Wolfe were criminally indicted for sex trafficking, among other charges. Garcia and Wolfe are currently in federal custody. Pratt is a fugitive.

Jane Doe 1 also gave evidence about the enormous impact online publication and subsequent WikiPorn leak had on her life. She has since had plastic surgery to try to disguise her appearance.

“I’ve gotten cheek fillers to try and change the structure of my face and microbladed my eyebrows to try and change my appearance,” she said.

At one point, the judge asked her if she needed a break from talking, as she described holding a loaded gun and thinking about taking her own life.

“I shake, I throw up from anxiety. I am on four different pills a day for anxiety. In law school I couldn’t focus.”

In November 2015 60 emails and phone calls called for her to be expelled. The emails went to the dean of the law school, and to the head of the student body with links to the video. “I felt ripped apart, piece by piece. Honestly I wanted to commit suicide when it all came out … I tried moving away. I have tried going places people don’t know me and it just follows me everywhere.

Her life, she says, is irrevocably changed, and her hopes of a legal career have been ended.

“I do not want a career as an attorney. My name is completely destroyed.”

Full article here

QotD: “Woman-on-woman pressure isn’t better”

Is sexism even worse when it comes from another woman? And why do some women try to professionally “out-jock” men?

These were my thoughts when I read about how actress Ruth Wilson left the television series The Affair because of what she claims is a toxic, inappropriate culture involving enforced sex scenes. As a fan of The Affair, I’d wondered why Wilson left so abruptly, with only one season to go. The Hollywood Reporter says that Wilson was labelled “difficult” for objecting to relentless nude sequences (demanded of her far more often than her male co-stars). Wilson refused to do a “rapey” scene against a tree. (A body double was used.) During filming of some sex scenes, monitors could be viewed by non-crew members.

There’s more gruesome detail, including a disputed report on Lena Dunham’s now-defunct newsletter and website Lenny Letter, where producer/director of The Affair, Jeffrey Reiner, spoke to Dunham, praising her nudity in Girls (“You would show anything. Even your asshole”), saying he wished she’d encourage Wilson to “show her tits or at least some vag”. Now it is reported that The Affair’s showrunner, Sarah Treem, also pressured Wilson (and others) into nudity, making remarks such as “You look beautiful” and “Everyone is waiting for you”.

Excuse me while I throw up into a bin. Why can’t women such as Wilson be beautiful and clothed – and why should they feel responsible for disrupting filming schedules for nude scenes they find so distressing they leave a hit show?

If this is true (Treem denies it, saying she’s a feminist), it’s grotesque on multiple levels. Like the recent story about Emilia Clarke dreading nudity on Game of Thrones, it seems that actresses who question the validity of nude scenes still risk being labelled “difficult”. (Note the similarities with porn, where women must not only perform but do so enthusiastically or risk disrupting the male fantasy.) With The Affair, there’s the added factor of alleged woman-on-woman betrayal.

I suppose it happens and not just on television sets. In ill-judged attempts to “prove themselves” in high-octane, male-dominated work environments, there are some women who try to outdo the jocks – doing everything from telling coarser jokes and showing bigger “killer” instincts to deriding other women for being “oversensitive/humourless” via, in this instance, badgering them to do nude scenes. Maybe these women justify the grotty sexism to themselves, rationalising that it’s not the same coming from a woman. Too right – it’s worse.

What a shame if Treem was part of this. Women in positions of power have the opportunity to support one another, not make it so that it isn’t just men that women have to worry about. A woman compelling another woman to do nudity doesn’t automatically make it “feminist”. Woman-on-woman pressure isn’t better. #MeToo has to include female behaviour too.

Barbara Ellen

QotD: “kid friendly pop culture mascot assures me it’s fine!”

(From tumblr)

QotD: “Revenge porn inquiry ‘sunk by Pornhub’”

The first shock was that her former boyfriend had filmed them having sex with each other. But the second shock was worse — he had uploaded the videos to the world’s leading free porn site.

The 24-year-old woman, an administrator from Derbyshire who wishes to remain anonymous, contacted her local police force in August last year after discovering that two leaked sex tapes had been posted on Pornhub by the man, whom she had dated for a year.

She found out after the man’s new partner sent her links to them on Snapchat and wrote: “You need to see this.” The videos, tagged with terms like “f****** my ex”, were allegedly viewed hundreds of times before being deleted.

Now Pornhub has been accused of contributing to the collapse of the investigation into the incident after police said it had failed to co-operate with requests for information. Pornhub claims it did not receive the emails. The case was closed last month due to a lack of evidence.

“When I watched the videos I felt sick,” the alleged victim said. “I knew straight away it was me. I felt dirty and ashamed, even though I had done nothing wrong. I thought I was in love with him at the time. I had no idea the videos had been filmed.”

Anyone can earn advertising revenue by uploading videos to Pornhub, with the most-watched clips racking up millions of views and top models generating tens of thousands of pounds.

Officers arrested a 28-year-old man last October, but the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said it needed further evidence, including a statement from Pornhub, before making a charging decision.

Derbyshire constabulary tried to contact Pornhub, owned by the Luxembourg-based company MindGeek, and initially received an email containing “technical information” about the videos. But it did not provide further details requested by the CPS, police said.

“A second request for information, which was required by the CPS, was submitted by email to Pornhub in March 2019 and a further follow-up email sent in April. There was no reply,” police said.

Kate Isaacs, from the campaign group #NotYourPorn, said: “It should be mandatory for porn websites to co-operate with the police to provide justice for those who have suffered sexual abuse and had it broadcast on their platform.”

The CPS said it was unable to make progress in the case because of a lack of “crucial” evidence, including information about “who, when and how the material was uploaded”. A spokesman added that pursuing Pornhub was “not the only possible line of inquiry” but that if the site supplied further details “then the file would be reopened and we would be able to make a charging decision”.

The woman said she was “appalled” by Pornhub’s alleged lack of co-operation.

She believes the videos were posted by her former partner, who has previous convictions for harassing women, shortly after she discovered that he was cheating on her: “I stood up to him and said: ‘No, I don’t want to speak to you any more.’ I think that loss of control kicked him off. There is no doubt in my mind that there will be other victims.”

Pornhub came under fire in July for hosting a video of a British teenager who claimed to have been gang-raped by up to 12 Israeli men at a hotel in Cyprus. Lawyers for the woman, who is currently on trial accused of making false allegations, claim she was a victim of revenge porn.

Blake White, Pornhub’s vice-president, said revenge porn videos violate the website’s terms and conditions and are removed if reported. He added that the company responded to an inquiry relating to the Derbyshire investigation and provided “personal information” about the account holder but “received an autoresponder email in return. Since then, we have no record of correspondence from Derbyshire constabulary.”

(source)

Ask the BBC why they are calling commercially raped children ‘sex workers’

The BBC has used the term ‘sex work’ in an article about drug dealing and child slavery. I have sent the following complaint:

I am writing to complain about the use of the term ‘sex work’ in an article about child slavery: ‘County-lines gangs fuelling’ child slavery rise.

Words matter, the BBC is supposed to be politically neutral, the debate over whether prostitution is ‘work like any other’ or exploitation and abuse is still ongoing in the UK. The use of the term ‘sex work’ is partisan, and it is begging the question (asking whether ‘sex work is work’ is like asking ‘is this bad thing bad’).

No child is a ‘sex worker’; even in countries that have legalised/decriminalised the sex industry, it is still illegal to purchase sex from anyone under the age of 18.

Calling a commercially raped adult or child a ‘sex worker’ reduces a sexual abuse issue to a mere labour issue.

Please consider complaining to the BBC, and please feel free to copy or adapt the above template. The BBC is a publicly funded body, indirectly through our taxes, and directly through the licence fee, they have to listen to complaints. You will probably be fobbed of with a standard response (as I was in a previous case), you will need to follow-up and say you were not satisfied with the original response to your complaint. You do not have to be a UK citizen to complain, but the form will ask you where you live.

This is how powerful the sex industry lobbyists are; they complain about being ‘marginalised’ and ‘silenced’ but they have managed to change the way we use language so much that mainstream news sources now routinely call commercially raped adults and children ‘sex workers’. I am sure there are post-modern academics right now writing papers about the ‘choice’ and ‘agency’ of the children being used as drug-mules, but that language is currently confined to academia.

The legalised cannabis industry in the US lobbies for tighter controls and regulations, while the organisations claiming to speak on behalf of prostitutes and porn performers lobby for fewer controls. The legalised cannabis industry is controlled by a completely different group of people than the illegal industry, while whenever the sex industry is legalised/decriminalised, the pimps and brothel keepers are rebranded as ‘sex entrepreneurs’, even while they still rely on trafficking to fuel their industry.

(That people, mostly poor and black, are still in prison in the US for crimes committed pre-legalisation of an industry now mostly run by middle-class white people is a real issue, but that doesn’t take away from the fact that the legalised cannabis industry is cleaned-up and well-regulated, while the legalised/decriminalised sex industry is basically just rubber-stamping what was going on already and turning criminals into ‘business men’.)

QotD: “Porn contracts ‘prey on vulnerable girls'”

Former top porn actress Mia Khalifa has called out pornography companies that “prey on callow young women”.

The 26-year-old says the corporations “trap women legally in to contracts when they’re vulnerable”.

Mia spent just three months working in the porn industry before leaving in 2015 but she remains a highly ranked star on site Pornhub.

Speaking in an interview with her friend Megan Abbott, Mia says she “hasn’t yet accepted [her] past”.

Mia has usually avoided speaking about her career in porn, but says she’s “ready to shed light on every questionable moment from my past, because if I own it, it can’t be used against me”.

She is one of the most-viewed porn stars of all time – but Mia says that didn’t necessarily equate to payment.

She says she made around $12,000 (£9,900) during her time performing and “never saw a penny again after that”.

There is still an active website under her name, which she says she doesn’t own or profit from.

“All I’ve wanted these last years is for the site to be changed from my direct name,” she says.

The Lebanon-born performer opened up about how difficult it is to move on after porn, as she found out when attempting to pursue a career in sports punditry.

“It gets me so down when I get ‘no’s’ from companies who don’t want to work with me because of my past, but I also thought I would never find a man like my fiancé,” she said.

Mia Khalifa got engaged to Robert Sandberg earlier this year.

“The fact that he appreciated everything I’ve done since porn meant so much.”

Although Mia’s career was short-lived, it wasn’t without controversy. Her most famous scene shows her performing sex acts whilst wearing a hijab.

“Instantly that it was posted, it was like wildfire. ISIS sent me death threats, they sent me a Google Maps image of my apartment.

“I stayed in a hotel for two weeks after that because fear really set in.”

With almost 17 million followers on her Instagram page, Mia often receives offensive messages from trolls.

“I don’t sweat the small stuff anymore, things people say don’t offend me. I always think ‘OK, but are you ISIS? Are you going to kill me? No, move on’.”

The actress was scouted on the street in Miami in 2014, and made her first porn film in October that year.

She didn’t plan for anyone to find out, telling Megan Abbott she saw it as her “dirty little secret”.

But by December she was the number one ranked performer on website Pornhub.

“I definitely have not come to terms with my past yet,” she says. “I might put on a facade, because I fake it until I make it.”

(source)

QotD: “Porn is warping the minds of a generation”

A pint of semi-skimmed, 20 Bensons, a scratchcard and, er, a porn pass . . . The odds on this becoming a regular corner-shop scenario crashed this week as Jeremy Wright, the culture secretary, announced that age verification checks for accessing online pornography would be delayed yet again, this time because the government forgot to inform the European Commission. No wonder it’s been called Sexit.

Age verification began as a thoughtful response by the coalition government to alarming NSPCC research that 65 per cent of 15 to 16-year-olds and almost a third of 12-year-olds access porn. That porn sites should be age-verified, as gambling domains already are, has a 67 per cent approval rating. The problem is that it’s technologically impossible to enforce.

From July 15, clicking on a porn site was supposed to generate a page where a user must provide proof via a credit card, passport or driving licence that they are over 18. Unfortunately Britain stands nobly alone in this endeavour against a global porn industry. And any fool can easily install a VPN (virtual private network): a bit of software which conceals your geographical location. British kids use them already to dodge rights issues, particularly to access US Netflix with its superior range of films.

A VPN would allow a porn user to swerve the UK age-blocker. And which punter wouldn’t do that rather than give personal details to the state-approved verification firm AgeID (which, unbelievably, has the same owner as Pornhub)? No amount of blah about safe encrypted data will reassure anyone that their name and mugshot won’t one day pop up alongside their taste for “watersports” and MILFs.

The alternative would be to go into a shop and, after showing an age ID, buy a £4.99 porn pass. While oldsters might find this no more embarrassing than the time they bumped into their mate’s mum while buying a copy of Razzle, young people have grown up under the total anonymity of the web. Besides, they would simply access porn on platforms such as WhatsApp, Reddit or Snapchat. And a VPN can make the internet an even more dangerous landscape, opening up blocked extremist, paedophile and drug sites on the dark web.

Yet whether age-verification is feasible should not distract from the bigger, more pressing question: does allowing the porn industry to pipe its product unrestricted into every home have toxic consequences? Ireland is reeling from the murder of Ana Kriegel, 14, found naked with extensive injuries and a ligature around her neck, killed by two 13-year-old boys. One of the boys was found to have phones containing thousands of pornographic images, many involving children and animals. The Irish prime minister has said he will be viewing Britain’s age-verification plans closely.

This, of course, is the most extreme scenario. Experts speculated in 1993 whether James Bulger’s killers were inspired by “video nasties” or were just disturbed children who’d have killed in any era. But there is no question that having immediate access to images once obtained only by writing to obscure PO box addresses has changed society. Police now investigate 1,000 cases of offenders viewing child abuse images each month: our jails could not accommodate them all so most are dismissed with a caution on a first offence. Many such men say that viewing “barely legal” porn involving teenagers on legal sites drew them to younger children.

There has also been a spate of deaths of women at the hands of partners who claimed they were engaged in consensual “sex games”. These include Anna Reed, 22, from Harrogate who was suffocated in a Swiss hotel room; Charlotte Teeling, 33, from Birmingham, who was strangled, as was Hannah Dorans, 21, from Edinburgh. Natalie Connolly, 26, was penetrated with a bottle of carpet cleaner and left for dead at the bottom of the stairs. All the men concerned argued that “rough sex” or “Fifty Shades of Grey games” had gone wrong, that these women had, in effect, consented to their own deaths.

These are scenes choreographed by violent pornography, which is not some rare category but just a click away. Researchers studying aggressive porn that involves slaps, hair-pulling and choking found that in 95 per cent of cases the actresses responded with expressions of pleasure, suggesting to the viewer that violence is desired.

Is it any coincidence that the first generation of children exposed to hardcore pornography before their first kiss have epidemic levels of mental illness? The extreme aesthetics of porn fuel body-hatred in young women, while psychologists are concerned that a growing cohort of young men are so desensitised by porn that they suffer erectile dysfunction and emotional disconnection from real women. Moreover, when sex is learnt through porn — a misogynist industry focused solely on male desire — girls prioritise their performance above their own pleasure.

This is now normalised in the mainstream: Teen Vogue ran a feature on anal sex, which most women find uncomfortable, even painful, but is demanded by some men because it’s a major porn trope. Teen Vogue’s anatomical diagram did not even include the clitoris.

Yet young women are not allowed to balk at porn. In the US high school comedy Booksmart, two girls watch porn on their phone in horror. One tries to tell herself she must enjoy it because “I’m a sex-positive feminist”. Not to love porn marks a girl out as uncool, conservative and “unwoke”. Age-verifying technology is, alas, a distraction from the real conversation we need with young people about porn. That it is not feminist nor is it positive sex.

Janice Turner