Chomsky on Porn

[joshcryer]

111. There are plenty of interviews in that vein.

Search for the names on this site, each will come up with their personal stories: http://donnypauling.net/2010/03/11/is-this-sexy/

The initial choice is probably glamor and easy money.

One really peculiar thing left out of these discussions are gay for pay, such as straight males doing gay scenes for money. That's got to be exploitive, whether you want to say it is or not, if the guy can't get scenes with women or is making more money doing other guys, then he's being exploited, even if he chooses to do it, the choice is forced upon him by his economic expectations and desires within society.

I do think we can blame consumers but I think that in fact the move away from more exploitive porn to less exploitive porn as the internet evolves is proof that consumers don't want exploitive porn. If you watch a Kink.com video and listen to the actors in the videos, they talk about the experience going into it and after the fact, and it is always a good experience. Safe words are pushed hard in that environment and the actors are there to enjoy themselves (just like regular actors).

If a college girl gets walked up to by some recruiter and he goes "hey, we'll give you a thousand bucks to do this one scene, it'll only take thirty minutes" it's a very difficult proposition to pass up on, especially if one naively thinks that their reputation will survive it. We see this actually in the case with some teachers who did those one time gigs only to be fired from their jobs later on in life once their past acting behavior was found out. Would said aspiring teacher had necessarily taken the thousand bucks if there was a living wage? A negative income tax (ie a living wage, guaranteed income, above poverty, etc)?

Doubtful.