Hacker News Reader

Comment by rasz | Hacker News Reader

Anal, gangbangs, humiliation and other hardcore scenes pay extra. Significantly better money than normal scenes.

Take Lana Rhoades for example, an "outspoken critic of the adult industry" with numerous anal gangbangs and humiliation scenes under her belt:

"One of the worst... honestly, I feel like I'm in denial sometimes and I can't accept some of the things that I've done.

"There was one thing that, ya know, I tried talking to a therapist about before something that I had to do for a scene that was really rough for me.

"Basically, this guy had a bowl and he, like, gagged me until I threw up into it and he, like, pissed in the bowl, and during the scene he asked me to drink it, and I didn't know how to say no.

"It was one of the most disgusting, foul scenes."

It was so traumatic .... Lena decided to go back two more times to do more humiliation scenes with same producer. $$$$

View on HN

>It was so traumatic .... Lena decided to go back two more times to do more humiliation scenes with same producer.

Honestly doesn't sound any different to the women who go from one abusive boyfriend to the next. There's something going on there, and I think it's more than economics.

Something like Stockholm syndrome?

> Something like Stockholm syndrome?

More like PTSD and the difficulty it can produce dealing with normal situations.

Stockholm Syndrome is something invented on the spot, by someone integral to advising the police violence in question, to leverage misogyny to dismiss criticism of unnecessary police violence endangering hostages in a particular event, that remains a popular idea because media (both news and fictional) likes invoking it.

Trauma leads to changes in brain chemistry that can cause reenactment behaviors until the trauma gets resolved

https://lakesidemilam.com/blog/trauma-stress-repetition-comp...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3330499/

> It was so traumatic .... Lena decided to go back two more times to do more humiliation scenes with same producer. $$$$

I'm not sure if you're trying to imply snarkily that because Lena went back to do more pornography shoots that she is lying about her experience and trauma. But just in case that is what you're implying it's worth me pointing out that repitition is a very common consequence of sufferring a trauma. The mental effects of trauma cause a cycle of trauma re-enactment behaviors.

https://lakesidemilam.com/blog/trauma-stress-repetition-comp...

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2664732/

What they mean is that money is that higher in those scenes that they endure to do it again even if they're traumatic.

I think the defense from porn sites would be that you could apply this to a whole range of destructive behaviors, from self-harm, to stealing, to causing trauma in others (in fact this is considered an important factor in essentially all forms of abuse). Yes, people can use porn to destroy themselves. It's not the worst thing people do, by far. There's the occasional story of porn actually helping (you know, because money).

Why should you need to prove that you're doing porn shoots for the right reasons ... and not when buying anything even remotely sharp (which may be used for self-harm), or for private sex acts (so why shouldn't there be limits on buying condoms or lube or ...)?

And yet when we put it in ways that would really make a difference, like requiring when a teacher buys a "barely 18" magazine, the police gets notified. Or, in Europe, when buying or surfing to anything extreme-right (a BIG no-no for anyone in public office in many WW2 participant countries, Germany, France, Belgium, ...). That would be totally unacceptable, and yet would probably protect more people than porn regulations.

And, lastly, porn (and ...) is a way people survive. If you take it away you are taking away people's livelihoods, which will have strong negative consequences for them. Is homelessness better or worse than porn? Because all these "protect women" efforts are a bit like youth care: any careful look at the alternative will make you question if these people have the good of those women at heart.

I'm not saying porn should be banned, I'm just think people are misinformed that there are no consequences to it, or that it's harmless.

Just like the solution to drug addiction isn't making drug usage illegal, neither is banning porn.

All that proves is that people who are messed up struggle to change their lives. The idea that someone is doing those things to make a fortune is daft.

Porn is a machine that turns drug addicts into money. It's objectively bad as far as I'm concerned.

Certainly not fortune, but fame, adoration, good living, future without actual work. Rich husband, influencer career, etc. Drug addicts dont last in porn.

> Drug addicts dont last in porn.

The producers know. And swap them out. As long there is somebody else, who can be abused by the same promises.

>future without actual work

Did you read TFA that goes in explicit details of the amount of actual work involved in porn?

Probably parent doesn't consider sex work as "actual work", which is stupid. Sex work is probably the oldest form of "actual work" since modern civilization or even older.

You simply misunderstood me. Porn is treated by many performers as a gateway to larger things. Getting noticed, gaining notoriety, scoring rich husbands (footballer, Harvard professor), building "my after pron" careers like Lana.

Free porn online is marketing for high priced prostitution.

If you have lots of money, you can have sex with pornstars for money.

Dakota Skye lasted quiet a long time until she OD'd.

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/porn-s...

> Porn is a machine that turns drug addicts into money.

Consider this[1]: "Belle Delphine is a hugely successful OnlyFans model making $1.2 million a month."

[1] https://www.insider.com/belle-delphine-net-worth-onlyfans-dr...

Yes, a single counterexample negates the general trend.

I have a friend who is gay and some 15 years ago when online webcams were starting had earned enough to buy a flat and a car with this, within 1 or 2 years. Nothing hardcore. It was mostly from tips. Wouldn't be possible to earn that much now, not for same things.

I guess sudden relative wealth isn't something many of these can handle properly and start doing stupid things.

I read that as per year at first. Per. Month. Wow.

> Porn is a machine that turns drug addicts into money. It's objectively bad as far as I'm concerned.

Here's an idea - regulate the porn industry so that anyone failing a drug test is cannot work in it, make the tests mandatory.

What we need is a war on drugs. We'll totally win that and there won't be drugs anymore.

> What we need is a war on drugs. We'll totally win that and there won't be drugs anymore.

I did not express an opinion on the legalisation (or not) of any drug at all.

My point is that if performers are performing only due to promise of getting their next fix, then regulating the industry and preventing them from getting hired at all in porn is a good solution. After all, what are the alternatives?

Lots of industries have regulations on drug use (once again, it's irrelevant whether the drug in question is legal or not); why not add the porn industry to that list?

Maybe we can change the game-theoretic parameters of the universe to disincentivize short-term outcome optimisation.

I don't think this is your implied reading of what you present, but it's worth considering how desperate for money (or how self-destructive, either is deeply concerning) you need to be to be willing to keep going back to traumatizing experience after traumatizing experience despite being aware enough of the trauma to seek out a mental health professional.

It's one thing to look at a story like this and say "oh, well, porn actresses knowingly make bad choices, I guess they just want the cash" and another to question what drives people to knowingly self-harm for money.

Its their choice. You can do 10 solo toy scenes, or one where some repulsive dude puts a toilet seat on your neck and pisses straight into your mouth. Why blame third parties for your own consensual life choices?

>Why blame third parties for your own consensual life choices?

Because certain people (homeless, mentally ill, dealing with substance abuse) will agree to degrading treatment that no regular person would accept. Taking advantage of someone in these sorts of situations is predatory.

And the porn industry seems designed to wash guilt. The directors just make films. The sites just host content. The viewers just watch content.

But in aggregate, this system creates a huge financial incentive to exploit anyone you can.

I'm all for regulation, if done in a non-puritanical, individual freedom-promoting way. People should be able to choose to be involved in producing porn. No one should feel forced into producing porn.

If we, as a society, aren't willing to ban porn (and I don't think we should), then we have a moral obligation to prevent workplace exploitation in its production via regulation, investigation, and social support resources.

Maybe the solution is to pursue a society where people are not so unequal that they feel tempted to degrade themselves for money? Maybe we should have minimum income to at least a level where everyone is capable of meeting basic needs, basically "fuck you money" for everyone.

IMHO doing obviously unethical work for money is also degrading and is much more common than porn. It's one thing if someone wants the money and doesn't care, but there are millions of people around the world in e.g. scam call centers that do this kind of work to stay out of the worst of the slums.

I caught the pre-edit phrasing and agreed with it too. ;)

But agreed that the greater good would be looking at the structural facts that force people into unethical work and addressing those.

I know you propose it with a maybe and i do not mean to attack you. That said, it is so simplistic to think people only do degrading things because they need money, that if they had money it would not happen. I think we are so more gray than that.

"fuck you money" is undefined. I am pretty sure that there are people that do not care about the amount, they care how they are compared to their peers. Just for these people, arguably most people, your solution already fails.

The other simplification is the assertion that degradation is a universal concept and that the threshold is the same. This is extremely difficult to define and i am pretty sure a catholic priest's definition of degradation starts at anything else than marital sex. We can define something more liberal but then we need to take the great step of saying what is acceptable regarding one's sexuality. Seems to me most liberal societies decide to bail that discussion, just deciding that if you did it without coercion it is fine. I also find that position objectionable by the way, as there are work contracts which are by definition illegal(eg, a contract for work of more than 40 hours per week), and i do not see why we could not go further.

All and all, maybe giving these people social security, requirements for mental and physical tests, a subsidy for change of employment, could help lower the chance of unfair and dysfunctional societies. At the same time if someone wants to do, distribute or consume this stuff, then we get the benefit that the chain is legitimate. I think that is really worth it. Sex workers do really important social work.

Absolutely. The problem with sex work isn't that it's sex, but that it's work.

It's both. All wage labor is exploitative. But that doesn't mean all wage labor is equally abusive. Even without the cultural biases against sex work, there's a tangible difference in the vulnerability of selling intimacy.

That observation has nothing to do with the porn industry. The agricultural and meat processing industries have been aware of this for centuries.

Its an avenue for people who consistently make bad decisions to monetize that trait.

Brutal take, but I would argue it's just as valid as the opposite take:

"People who helplessly fell through the cracks become victims of those preying on the weak"

In reality its a mix of both and would come down to arguing over which is more prevelant.

People often to go back to their abusers, even though it means getting abused again. That doesn't mean it's okay to abuse them.

no one is telling you you can’t get off to it, you just don’t get to act like it’s ok anymore. we both understand that there are factors outside of money when exchanging it for services. these women are offered things they can’t turn down due to other issues. no need to dance around it, just add lack of consent to your kinks and the porn is even better

Nice personal attack.

>can’t turn down due to other issues

Like what? The difference between soft and hardcore stuff is probably ~10x the payout at the extreme end. So instead of one $3-5K scene and lets go shopping you now have to work every 2-4 days.

how’s it a personal attack? the scene is legal, the exchange is known to both parties, it’s completely between two consenting adults, don’t kink shame.

so the term i’m dancing around is intersectionality. the opportunities afforded to these folks present them with artificially constrained options, and that constraint is the true issue here, not the porn. do not misrepresent my argument because you assumed i was being an ass, i’m just trying to call it as it is and for us to acknowledge it not change it lol

> these women are offered things they can’t turn down due to other issues.

Yes that's generally how jobs work. You need to take them to make money to survive. Porn is not special in this case.

I used to think this way too and the attitude is still widespread even on the left, but porn is special because sex work is tangibly different.

You may argue that the difference is entirely cultural and if our culture were different, sex work would stop being special, but with things being as they are, there's no place on Earth where sex work isn't different from other forms of work.

Heck, just looking at it without considering the actual sex acts and sexual nature of the work, porn is mixing a lot of extremes from other fields of work (emotional labor, selling your physical likeness, intense physical labor, etc) while often involving extremely toxic work environments and abusive business practices. It's "easy money" in terms of money received as a function of time spent, but it's not at all an easy line of work even if you ignore all the social and cultural aspects of it (e.g. risk of losing your home, losing custody, being disowned by your family, difficulty finding romantic partners, risk of being physically, emotionally and sexually abused by people outside work, etc).

There's something comparable there to workers doing extremely dangerous work, like crab fishing, oil drilling, and so forth. They pay crazy amounts of money because of the danger, only crazy people do the work. There's a huge psychological difference with sex work, of course, and the insurance and legal protections leave a lot to be desired. Maybe extreme work that entails risk of permanent physical harm should have a standard mandatory insurance threshold.

The contracts porn stars sign are often abusive of themselves.

American prudishness is a nasty force in the world. Sex work needs better regulation, less stigma, and maybe post office style banking isn't such a bad idea, since they couldn't discriminate against people in this arena.

She also was involved in a crypto rugpull that she says was a result of the community not being positive enough for her: https://youtu.be/zPLiLCmGhkA

So perhaps, given this dishonesty, we should consider how truthful her statements above may be.

Or maybe we should take what she's saying on a case by case basis and also recognise the effects traumatic experiences can have as the range of factors at play in criminality. To reduce someone to the position of a hard wired liar who didn't deserve compassion or a voice is very worrying especially in 2022.

It's well documented that trauma survivors will seek out ways to relive their trauma. What you're suggesting is very dangerous and it's honestly frightening to see such an uninformed take on HN.

Whatever you have to say, I think mocking this person is wrong. Maybe you don't mean it to come across that way, but that's what it looks like to me.

Also, that's not how trauma works. People can't get out of it emotionally and mentally, like people who suffer abuse in other contexts. Also, people need money to survive, and exploitation is sadly not unusual.

Are these studios not responsible for traumatic outcomes tho? Or do they just weasel themselves out with contracts and jurisdictions with no such protection?

Or is mental health generally not protected same as physical health?

You kinda know what is going to happen when signing to do a scene for Facial Abuse dot com (repulsive human toilet people) or kink com (someone eventually sticks a cordless drill dildo in you while simultaneously pouring liquid vax, while you are hanging from ceiling by the leg).

> You kinda know what is going to happen when signing

In fact, many performers say they do not, and they are taken advantage of. Many say they are lied to. I've read them talk about using safe words, and the men ignorning them and cutting them out of the footage.

I actually feel disgusted sharing the same community with you.

Your take is bad and it's gross that you think this way about exploitation in the adult film industry.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com