HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Porn stars: NO more damag...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 09:09 PM

Porn stars: NO more damaged than the rest of us

http://www.salon.com/2012/11/28/study_porn_stars_arent_damaged/

A report finds adult actresses are happier than the rest of us -- and that being naked might lead to self-esteem
BY TRACY CLARK-FLORY

A common stereotype of a female porn star is an insecure, sexually abused, mentally ill and/or drug-addled woman. It’s one supported by anecdotes (most memorably by Linda Lovelace’s harrowing autobiography) and rhetoric (the feminist scholar Catharine MacKinnon went so far as to claim that all porn actresses were sexually abused as children). But as for actual research? Eh, not so much.

Now, a new study claims to have debunked this truism, which is known as the “damaged goods hypothesis.”

Some performers were amused by the news. “As a happy, healthy female porn performer, my reaction is: thanks, science, thanks so much for proving I am real,” says writer and porn performer Lorelei Lee in an email.


Link to actual study http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00224499.2012.719168

211 replies, 27224 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 211 replies Author Time Post
Reply Porn stars: NO more damaged than the rest of us (Original post)
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 OP
LineReply .
Occulus Nov 2012 #1
neverforget Nov 2012 #10
LadyHawkAZ Nov 2012 #11
hifiguy Nov 2012 #17
opiate69 Nov 2012 #24
nolabear Nov 2012 #29
Gore1FL Nov 2012 #44
Javaman Nov 2012 #88
mn9driver Nov 2012 #45
UnrepentantLiberal Nov 2012 #54
Jeff In Milwaukee Nov 2012 #152
Yavin4 Nov 2012 #28
opiate69 Nov 2012 #30
Turborama Nov 2012 #73
rainin Nov 2012 #183
Odin2005 Nov 2012 #185
Bucky Nov 2012 #155
msanthrope Nov 2012 #90
opiate69 Nov 2012 #91
Turborama Nov 2012 #195
opiate69 Nov 2012 #196
Initech Nov 2012 #110
Aerows Nov 2012 #132
Duer 157099 Nov 2012 #126
opiate69 Nov 2012 #128
Duer 157099 Nov 2012 #135
opiate69 Nov 2012 #141
seabeyond Nov 2012 #139
opiate69 Nov 2012 #142
Aerows Nov 2012 #172
Aerows Nov 2012 #131
GoneOffShore Nov 2012 #2
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #3
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #4
Warpy Nov 2012 #55
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #56
Cerridwen Nov 2012 #5
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #8
seaglass Nov 2012 #78
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #79
progressoid Nov 2012 #6
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #9
regnaD kciN Nov 2012 #181
cleanhippie Nov 2012 #47
hughee99 Nov 2012 #68
TexasBushwhacker Nov 2012 #71
Odin2005 Nov 2012 #7
LadyHawkAZ Nov 2012 #12
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #13
RainDog Nov 2012 #19
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #43
RainDog Nov 2012 #115
KittyWampus Nov 2012 #140
Zorra Nov 2012 #14
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #15
SpartanDem Nov 2012 #16
Taverner Nov 2012 #119
Guy Whitey Corngood Nov 2012 #18
Gidney N Cloyd Nov 2012 #23
trailmonkee Nov 2012 #25
jtuck004 Nov 2012 #31
LadyHawkAZ Nov 2012 #33
msanthrope Nov 2012 #92
LadyHawkAZ Nov 2012 #116
hifiguy Nov 2012 #130
cherokeeprogressive Nov 2012 #35
MrScorpio Nov 2012 #20
Canuckistanian Nov 2012 #21
R B Garr Nov 2012 #143
MNBrewer Nov 2012 #22
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #46
AngryAmish Nov 2012 #89
Odin2005 Nov 2012 #187
Skittles Nov 2012 #26
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #36
snooper2 Nov 2012 #87
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #103
Skittles Nov 2012 #144
hobbit709 Nov 2012 #27
Kennah Nov 2012 #39
chalky Nov 2012 #113
ismnotwasm Nov 2012 #32
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #37
Kennah Nov 2012 #42
seaglass Nov 2012 #96
kwassa Nov 2012 #34
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #40
cleanhippie Nov 2012 #49
LadyHawkAZ Nov 2012 #53
LineLineLineLineLineReply .
UnrepentantLiberal Nov 2012 #58
obamanut2012 Nov 2012 #108
closeupready Nov 2012 #117
Odin2005 Nov 2012 #188
kwassa Nov 2012 #65
cleanhippie Nov 2012 #84
kwassa Nov 2012 #67
loli phabay Nov 2012 #74
LineLineReply ?
LadyHawkAZ Nov 2012 #50
kwassa Nov 2012 #157
riderinthestorm Nov 2012 #165
kwassa Nov 2012 #176
LadyHawkAZ Nov 2012 #170
kwassa Nov 2012 #174
LadyHawkAZ Nov 2012 #178
kwassa Nov 2012 #180
LadyHawkAZ Nov 2012 #191
kwassa Nov 2012 #197
LadyHawkAZ Nov 2012 #198
kwassa Nov 2012 #199
LadyHawkAZ Nov 2012 #200
Orrex Nov 2012 #51
kwassa Nov 2012 #159
Orrex Nov 2012 #162
AtheistCrusader Nov 2012 #61
loli phabay Nov 2012 #76
Gore1FL Nov 2012 #97
loli phabay Nov 2012 #109
Gore1FL Nov 2012 #182
kwassa Nov 2012 #160
loli phabay Nov 2012 #175
Warren DeMontague Dec 2012 #210
snooper2 Nov 2012 #111
sendero Nov 2012 #169
kwassa Nov 2012 #177
sendero Nov 2012 #190
kwassa Nov 2012 #193
Warren DeMontague Dec 2012 #209
kwassa Dec 2012 #211
Kennah Nov 2012 #38
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #41
mindwalker_i Nov 2012 #64
Orrex Nov 2012 #48
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #59
Orrex Nov 2012 #70
Drale Nov 2012 #104
SariesNightly Nov 2012 #52
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #57
tammywammy Nov 2012 #60
MrSlayer Nov 2012 #62
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #63
loli phabay Nov 2012 #75
Eyes of the World Nov 2012 #66
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #81
jeanlibny594283 Nov 2012 #69
hifiguy Nov 2012 #72
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #80
hifiguy Nov 2012 #114
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #145
trumad Nov 2012 #77
FSogol Nov 2012 #82
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #86
Nye Bevan Nov 2012 #83
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #85
hifiguy Nov 2012 #112
lumberjack_jeff Nov 2012 #167
Silent3 Nov 2012 #94
Drale Nov 2012 #105
riderinthestorm Nov 2012 #93
Gormy Cuss Nov 2012 #98
riderinthestorm Nov 2012 #100
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #102
riderinthestorm Nov 2012 #149
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #150
riderinthestorm Nov 2012 #156
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #158
riderinthestorm Nov 2012 #161
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #163
riderinthestorm Nov 2012 #168
kwassa Nov 2012 #164
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #166
kwassa Nov 2012 #179
La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2012 #204
seabeyond Dec 2012 #205
La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2012 #206
Gormy Cuss Nov 2012 #184
riderinthestorm Nov 2012 #186
redqueen Nov 2012 #107
LadyHawkAZ Nov 2012 #118
redqueen Nov 2012 #122
LadyHawkAZ Nov 2012 #123
redqueen Nov 2012 #124
LadyHawkAZ Nov 2012 #127
redqueen Nov 2012 #129
LadyHawkAZ Nov 2012 #133
hifiguy Nov 2012 #138
hifiguy Nov 2012 #134
EOTE Nov 2012 #136
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #146
redqueen Nov 2012 #147
opiate69 Nov 2012 #153
WilmywoodNCparalegal Nov 2012 #95
x2 vancouverite Nov 2012 #99
Taverner Nov 2012 #120
Botany Nov 2012 #101
obamanut2012 Nov 2012 #106
Taverner Nov 2012 #121
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #148
obamanut2012 Nov 2012 #201
retread Nov 2012 #125
hifiguy Nov 2012 #137
Systemshock212 Nov 2012 #151
hifiguy Nov 2012 #171
bluestateguy Nov 2012 #154
Bucky Nov 2012 #173
TeeYiYi Nov 2012 #189
treestar Nov 2012 #192
La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2012 #203
leftlibdem420 Nov 2012 #194
TwilightGardener Nov 2012 #202
LongTomH Dec 2012 #207
La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2012 #208

Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 09:11 PM

1. .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Occulus (Reply #1)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 09:30 PM

10. Scoot over

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to neverforget (Reply #10)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 09:31 PM

11. Scoot further over

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to neverforget (Reply #10)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 09:44 PM

17. Hey, make room on the couch!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hifiguy (Reply #17)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 10:43 PM

24. Scoot over!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to opiate69 (Reply #24)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 10:52 PM

29. Scrunch up, you guys!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolabear (Reply #29)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:26 PM

44. I brought another sofa with me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gore1FL (Reply #44)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:23 AM

88. I got some floor cushions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolabear (Reply #29)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:26 PM

45. Here, I brought more popcorn

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolabear (Reply #29)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:44 PM

54. I brought a friend.

 



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UnrepentantLiberal (Reply #54)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:15 PM

152. You guys crack me up...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Occulus (Reply #1)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 10:51 PM

28. Can we get healthier snacks?

How about celery stalks and carrots?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #28)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 10:54 PM

30. Yuk!! Well... Ok.. But just keep 'em down your end of the couch!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #28)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 02:26 AM

73. Make some room, I've brought humous, babaganoush, falafals and pitta to go with those

Don't worry, I only used olive oil...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Turborama (Reply #73)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:19 PM

183. I don't know what we're scooting over for, but that makes me hungry.

Where will that dinner be? Yumm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Turborama (Reply #73)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:31 PM

185. HUMMUS!!!

*DROOL*

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #28)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:36 PM

155. Nice post, Mayor Bloomberg

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Occulus (Reply #1)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:30 AM

90. Did you bring the bourbon? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #90)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:31 AM

91. I never leave home without it! ;)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to opiate69 (Reply #91)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:27 PM

195. For those of us dying for a smoke after such a long session...

I've got some mint and apple and some double apple to go with, too...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Turborama (Reply #195)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:29 PM

196. You are my new favoritist person!

(note to self... It's been ages since you smoked your hookah... rectify that soon)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Occulus (Reply #1)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 01:51 PM

110. Hey! Don't bogart the butter!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Initech (Reply #110)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:47 PM

132. I know!

When you get done with it, hand it to me

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Occulus (Reply #1)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:36 PM

126. Why is it the spectators always show up first?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duer 157099 (Reply #126)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:38 PM

128. Because...

the actors simply refuse to perform for anything less than a full house!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to opiate69 (Reply #128)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:53 PM

135. Oh

Snap!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duer 157099 (Reply #135)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 04:12 PM

141. lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to opiate69 (Reply #128)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 04:00 PM

139. looks to me like the audience is the performance,



i bust me up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #139)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 04:13 PM

142. lol. that was a good one sea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #139)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:14 PM

172. And the rest of us too!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Occulus (Reply #1)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:45 PM

131. Scooch over

and pass me some more butter to drizzle on mine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 09:13 PM

2. Saw this mentioned by Violet Blue on TinyNibbles the other day.

Decided not to post it because I'm a coward.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoneOffShore (Reply #2)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 09:15 PM

3. LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoneOffShore (Reply #2)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 09:16 PM

4. this is the first data driven article about porn stars

instead of the usual study (attitudes towards porn), so i though it was pretty interesting

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #4)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:47 PM

55. I find it fascinating since it is an actual study

and not just a series of anecdotes and ASSumptions pulled out of an author's rear end.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warpy (Reply #55)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:49 PM

56. yeah, so do i. i find data to be better than stereotypes

anecdotes and assumptions

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 09:19 PM

5. Or "the rest of us" are just as damaged as "porn stars"

Porn star has a problematic definition in this study; as noted in this study. It sure would be nice to talk about this with nuance for a change. I don't see that happening. I'll just include a snip from the conclusions the researchers made:

Although this study provides valuable information on porn actresses, several limitations should be pointed out. First, random sampling was not used in recruiting porn actresses or the matched sample, which reduces the generalizability of the findings. Pornography actress participation rate is unknown because the size of the population is largely unknown. AIM tested approximately 1,200 performers a month, and it was estimated that there are 1,200 to 1,500 performers working in Los Angeles County (Kaiser Daily HIV/AIDS Report, 2004), but these numbers fluctuate and there was no way to distinguish between actresses working for major production companies, cyberporn sites, or both. Essentially, actresses working for production companies must be tested once every 28 days to legally work in Los Angeles County. Others working for cyberporn sites are not required to get tested but may choose to do so for different reasons. AIM was one of dozens of facilities where individuals could go for testing. AIM had a large number of clients from the adult entertainment industry because the organization had many employees who had worked in the pornography industry or had extensive experience with it. There is not a registry where performers have to be licensed, so there is no accurate way to calculate exactly how many performers there are at a given time. It is certainly possible that there was a self-selection bias such that those who chose to participate were different from those who chose not to participate. This is an important methodological issue, but it should be pointed out that although there has been interest in the characteristics of pornography actresses for decades, there has been a lack of studies because of the difficulty in accessing this population (Abramovich, 2005). With regard to the matched sample, university and community samples were combined to gather a comparison group to control for age, ethnicity, and marital status. Although the matched group may not represent the typical woman because of the sampling procedures that were used, their responses were similar to other studies with regard to measures of sexual behaviors and attitudes (e.g., Breyer et al., 2010; Lindley, Barnett, Brandt, Hardin, & Burcin, 2008; Wells & Twenge, 2005), self-esteem (e.g., Baranik et al., 2008), quality of life measures (e.g., The WHOQOL Group, 1998), and alcohol and drug use (Johnston et al., 2011). Thus, the matched sample does appear to be a representative sample of typical responses of women found in national-level studies.


A second issue has to do with the definition of a porn actress. The Internet has greatly changed the scope of pornography in terms of how it is produced, presented, and viewed. These are all important factors that have changed since the advent of the widespread availability of pornography on the Internet. Today, it is possible to use a camcorder to film oneself having sex, upload it to the Web, and charge users to view it. Podlas (2000) suggested that a gender power shift has occurred because of the Internet such that women who emigrated from the traditional sex industry now operate successful cyberporn sites where they have gained more control of salary, work environment, and flexibility in scheduling. The Internet has created more opportunities for entrepreneurial women interested in a career in pornography and may represent an economically rational career choice for some women (Podlas, 2000; Strossen, 1995). The characteristics of women who run their own cyberporn sites may be different from actresses who are hired by production companies. Thus, the findings from this study should not be extrapolated to all female sex industry performers.


Third, some of the measures were problematic. Some measures used for sexual behaviors and attitudes were single-item indicators with unknown validities and reliabilities. As an example, participants were asked if they were victims of CSA without further clarifications or definitions. Thus, it is quite possible that a given behavior in a particular situation may have been perceived as CSA by one individual but not by another. Another issue with regard to measures is that education was not examined. Education has been found to be related to a variety of sex-related constructs and would have been a sound matching variable, and its inclusion should be strongly considered in future studies.


This study represented a systematic investigation that reported responses of porn actresses across a variety of domains and compared them to a matched sample. The characteristics of porn actresses have been largely assumptive, although much debate has surrounded the issue. Perhaps this study can provide some information that can be used to make informed decisions regarding porn actresses, rather than rely on stereotypes from sources lacking empirical data. Assumed stereotypes concerning this group of individuals were not found, as the damaged goods hypothesis was not supported. The majority of indicators of recent functioning suggested that porn actresses are not impaired compared to the matched sample with regard to CSA rates, quality of life, self-esteem, and recent drug use, and that they appear more similar to women not employed as porn actresses than previously thought.
(emphasis added since the paragraphs were such walls of words; I tried to get the thesis of each paragraph)

eta: to add one piece of emphasis

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cerridwen (Reply #5)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 09:25 PM

8. all published studies have to have a disclaimer & all research has limits

So these limitations to me, seem par for course for any published study.

This study is definitely a good beginning to actually look at the data instead of making assumption and stereotyping women in porn.

I hope they do follow up studies on other key metrics, such as job satisfaction, psychological safety etc

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #8)


Response to seaglass (Reply #78)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:53 AM

79. When you study a specific population like this, it is usual convenience sampling

rather than random sampling

Yes, prizes etc do not necessarily change results. You just ethically have to be carefully when you award prizes because people may stay longer in your experiment than they are actually comfortable with

I have studied stats pretty extensively, and in my opinion, it's almost impossible to study a target population with random sampling so convenience sampling/snowballing is common.

I am more interested in why they matched samples instead of random sampling women, i think they did this to control for extraneous factors which i find pretty admirable, because matching samples are pretty difficult to get by. If i ran this study, i would just compare porn stars to women in college, i would not really necessarily use matching samples

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 09:21 PM

6. well, Jenna Jameson is more damaged than us.

She supported Romney.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressoid (Reply #6)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 09:26 PM

9. true

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #9)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 08:55 PM

181. She just wanted to support a pair of even bigger boobs than her own...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressoid (Reply #6)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:31 PM

47. Deranged and deslusional is not the same as damaged.

But I know what you mean.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressoid (Reply #6)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 12:32 AM

68. Being in the 1%, it's somewhat logical for HER,

it's all the other Rmoney voters (not in the 1%) who are going to get screwed over by the very policies they support that are the ones that should be checked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressoid (Reply #6)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 01:12 AM

71. She was gang raped as a teen and her mother died when she was 2 n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 09:22 PM

7. *Grabs Popcorn*

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 09:34 PM

12. Interesting, although not surprising. Thanks for posting. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LadyHawkAZ (Reply #12)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 09:36 PM

13. yeah i can't say i was shocked

happiness is also 50% genetic, so there is that issue that happiness probably doesn't vary that much with profession

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #13)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 09:57 PM

19. interesting

do you have links on the happiness thing?

I'm also glad to see this study getting some attention.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RainDog (Reply #19)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:24 PM

43. have you seen the documentary on happiness?

its much more pleasant than reading a study http://www.thehappymovie.com/

it's a really good documentary

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #43)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 02:16 PM

115. haven't seen it. thanks! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #43)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 04:05 PM

140. Oh, interesting find! Thanks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 09:38 PM

14. There is an enormous amount of freedom that goes along with complete

lack of sexual inhibition and not feeling shame or guilt about being naked.

Not being affected by the guilt trips about sex and nudity that religions directly or indirectly lay on us is very life enhancing for anyone that can leave all that crap behind. (I'm not saying that we shouldn't be careful or make good choices).

I'm not surprised by the results of this study at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #14)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 09:41 PM

15. and it's a relatively well controlled industry

unlike prostitution, so there is more safety attached too

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 09:42 PM

16. The moralist brigade isn't going to like this....

maybe the right and a minority of the left, that seek to regulate what consenting adult do, will finally get the message. Just leave people alone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpartanDem (Reply #16)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:20 PM

119. No, they won't. They are convinced nobody would enter porn on their own volition...

 

And every porn star must have been forced at gunpoint...

Bubbles are strange things!

Nothing like the Pearl-Clutcher Bubble!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 09:53 PM

18. I would've gone into porn if it wasn't for

my ex wife being all uptight and shit...... oh that and the small penis

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Guy Whitey Corngood (Reply #18)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 10:23 PM

23. Don't sell yourself short. There's a niche market for everything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gidney N Cloyd (Reply #23)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 10:46 PM

25. however, the size of your salary is relative to the size of your....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trailmonkee (Reply #25)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:02 PM

31. ... portfolio. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trailmonkee (Reply #25)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:03 PM

33. ...tracts of land... n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LadyHawkAZ (Reply #33)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:36 AM

92. Always love an excuse to post Monty Python---



What, the curtains?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #92)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 02:37 PM

116. That movie will never get old. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #92)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:44 PM

130. There is no time when the posting of Python

is inappropriate. Now bring me the comfy chair!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trailmonkee (Reply #25)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:17 PM

35. Shoe? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 10:00 PM

20. Thanks to the internet, I've had the chance to converse with quite a few adult entertainers

And you know what I've found out?

Well, they're regular, well adjusted people… It's just that they like a lot of sex AND make a living from it by sharing what they're doing with everyone else. It's a job, a way to make a living, pay their bills and raise their families.

Families! Some of them are MARRIED with KIDS and their spouses know what they're doing! They hang out with their moms and dads, many of them know exactly what their jobs are. Many of these folks are going to school, they go shopping, out for meals and partying with friends at the club.

They're normal!

Do you know what their biggest problem is?

It's WEIRD people who are paying too much attention to the way they make their livelihoods, people who are too hung up about sex for their own good, people who can't live and let live and people who, may not be sex workers themselves, you definitely wouldn't want to be trapped in an elevator with them.

On the other hand…

Most adult entertainers are liberal, sex positive, quite a few think of themselves as feminist and pro-civil rights. They've made a choice to do what they do and can decide to move on to another form of employment anytime they want. Most of adult entertainment is directed by women, written and controlled by women and women are paid the biggest paychecks. Abusive people and people who are trying to cheat women performers find out that they are not welcome in the industry for long. The grapevine abides.

Even if I would never have a physical relationship with any adult entertainer, I wouldn't hesitate being associated with them in any way. They're good people.

They're also as appalled with sexually hung up muthafuckas as I am.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrScorpio (Reply #20)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 10:09 PM

21. +1

It's the great American conundrum.

Extremely judgmental about anything to do with sex.... yet the world's major producer of porn.

And I agree about the performers. They really manage to separate their personal and professional lives quite successfully.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrScorpio (Reply #20)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 04:14 PM

143. Wait, do they like a lot of sex or do they like getting paid for it

I would imagine that their number one goal in their pursuits is making money. In the meantime, they're supposedly living normal lives and taking care of the home front, which is what the rest of us are doing, but we get a bad rap for not always being in the mood at a moment's notice. Looks like these porn stars aren't always good to go any time of day either. Gotta walk the dog and take out the trash like the rest of us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 10:13 PM

22. Being naked

It's a good thing. One of the things I enjoy the most about being up at the Radical Faerie Sanctuary in northern Minnesota is the ability to be shamelessly naked. Naked in the woods, naked in the sharing circle, naked wherever, and nobody makes big deal of it. Same with sexual expression. Not a big deal.

And yes, I called myself a fairy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MNBrewer (Reply #22)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:28 PM

46. being part of the radical faeries is a very freeing experience

or so i am told by those who are

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MNBrewer (Reply #22)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:25 AM

89. to many mosquitoes!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MNBrewer (Reply #22)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:41 PM

187. Not in the WINTER, I hope!

It was 0F on Monday morning here in Fargo!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 10:48 PM

26. WTF

is the IGNORE function not working???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #26)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:18 PM

36. LOL

did you just post here to announce that i am your ignore list? ok.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #26)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:14 AM

87. we turned it off for you temporarily so you could see the World

in all it's Glory!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Reply #87)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 12:19 PM

103. lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Reply #87)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 04:36 PM

144. gawd, I will fucking pass on THAT!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 10:50 PM

27. That is going to torque a few jaws around here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hobbit709 (Reply #27)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:21 PM

39. Because they were in the middle of ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hobbit709 (Reply #27)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 02:05 PM

113. OMG - "torque my jaw"! I haven't heard anyone use that phrase (or any variant of)

since my mom passed back in '08. Thanks for the memories.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:03 PM

32. A survey of 177 porn actors.

Excuse me, make that actresses.


Ok.


Although this study provides valuable information on porn actresses, several limitations should be pointed out. First, random sampling was not used in recruiting porn actresses or the matched sample, which reduces the generalizability of the findings. Pornography actress participation rate is unknown because the size of the population is largely unknown. AIM tested approximately 1,200 performers a month, and it was estimated that there are 1,200 to 1,500 performers working in Los Angeles County (Kaiser Daily HIV/AIDS Report, 2004), but these numbers fluctuate and there was no way to distinguish between actresses working for major production companies, cyberporn sites, or both. Essentially, actresses working for production companies must be tested once every 28 days to legally work in Los Angeles County. Others working for cyberporn sites are not required to get tested but may choose to do so for different reasons. AIM was one of dozens of facilities where individuals could go for testing. AIM had a large number of clients from the adult entertainment industry because the organization had many employees who had worked in the pornography industry or had extensive experience with it. There is not a registry where performers have to be licensed, so there is no accurate way to calculate exactly how many performers there are at a given time. It is certainly possible that there was a self-selection bias such that those who chose to participate were different from those who chose not to participate. This is an important methodological issue, but it should be pointed out that although there has been interest in the characteristics of pornography actresses for decades, there has been a lack of studies because of the difficulty in accessing this population (Abramovich, 2005). With regard to the matched sample, university and community samples were combined to gather a comparison group to control for age, ethnicity, and marital status. Although the matched group may not represent the typical woman because of the sampling procedures that were used, their responses were similar to other studies with regard to measures of sexual behaviors and attitudes (e.g., Breyer et al., 2010; Lindley, Barnett, Brandt, Hardin, & Burcin, 2008; Wells & Twenge, 2005), self-esteem (e.g., Baranik et al., 2008), quality of life measures (e.g., The WHOQOL Group, 1998), and alcohol and drug use (Johnston et al., 2011). Thus, the matched sample does appear to be a representative sample of typical responses of women found in national-level studies.

A second issue has to do with the definition of a porn actress. The Internet has greatly changed the scope of pornography in terms of how it is produced, presented, and viewed. These are all important factors that have changed since the advent of the widespread availability of pornography on the Internet. Today, it is possible to use a camcorder to film oneself having sex, upload it to the Web, and charge users to view it. Podlas (2000) suggested that a gender power shift has occurred because of the Internet such that women who emigrated from the traditional sex industry now operate successful cyberporn sites where they have gained more control of salary, work environment, and flexibility in scheduling. The Internet has created more opportunities for entrepreneurial women interested in a career in pornography and may represent an economically rational career choice for some women (Podlas, 2000; Strossen, 1995). The characteristics of women who run their own cyberporn sites may be different from actresses who are hired by production companies. Thus, the findings from this study should not be extrapolated to all female sex industry performers.

Third, some of the measures were problematic. Some measures used for sexual behaviors and attitudes were single-item indicators with unknown validities and reliabilities. As an example, participants were asked if they were victims of CSA without further clarifications or definitions. Thus, it is quite possible that a given behavior in a particular situation may have been perceived as CSA by one individual but not by another. Another issue with regard to measures is that education was not examined. Education has been found to be related to a variety of sex-related constructs and would have been a sound matching variable, and its inclusion should be strongly considered in future studies.


In other words, not a bad study, but not a great one either.


AIM is a great organization though. Knowing someone has your back is invaluable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #32)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:20 PM

37. there is no perfect study

you cannot publish without listing at least three limitations to your study. i am sure most people who read journal articles know this.

ofcouse it's not perfect, no study ever is, but it is a good start to collect data of a sample you are interested in rather than merely stereotyping them or relying on the anecdotal evidence of some people in that industry

177 is a pretty good sample size for this

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #37)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:24 PM

42. "177 is a pretty good sample size for this"

It's 69 twice, and starting a third time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #32)


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:16 PM

34. oh, bullshit

I seriously doubt it.

sounds like monster wishful thinking. A single study is proof of very little, and the problems in the study ....

There is not a registry where performers have to be licensed, so there is no accurate way to calculate exactly how many performers there are at a given time. It is certainly possible that there was a self-selection bias such that those who chose to participate were different from those who chose not to participate. This is an important methodological issue,


Porn has little to do with real sexuality. it is simply a strange entertainment formula, extremely rigid and conformist, with no spontaneity, and highly repetitive. Those that get into it want quick money, and have no other skills that will pay them, at least temporarily, that well. Until the next cute young person shows up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #34)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:21 PM

40. i dont think this study is saying that porn is real sexuality

just that it doesn't seem to be full of damaged people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #40)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:34 PM

49. Give kwassa a break, thats the first outrage post of this thread so far!

I'm quite surprised at how many responses there were before someone showed up all outrages and totally misrepresented what your OP actually stated in order to justify said outrage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Reply #49)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:40 PM

53. They're all busy in Meta right now n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LadyHawkAZ (Reply #53)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:49 PM

58. .

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LadyHawkAZ (Reply #53)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 12:45 PM

108. lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LadyHawkAZ (Reply #53)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 02:47 PM

117. LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LadyHawkAZ (Reply #53)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:43 PM

188. DUzy!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cleanhippie (Reply #49)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 12:15 AM

65. going way out of the way to make a personal attack?

not surprised.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #65)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:07 AM

84. Going way out of the way to be outraged?

not surprised

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #40)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 12:16 AM

67. I doubt that, too.

it only makes certain people feel better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #67)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:44 AM

74. well if it makes certain people feel better shouldnt we let them have at it

 

Id say the majority of people i know who live alternative lifestyles and work in the industry are happy and enjoy the liberty that comes with it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #34)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:35 PM

50. ?


sounds like monster wishful thinking.


Are you claiming the study is fraudulent?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LadyHawkAZ (Reply #50)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:43 PM

157. I am claiming it is one study.

Which, in and of itself, will prove nothing without other studies that can replicate the results. Single studies say the most outrageous things in this world, and often do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #157)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:56 PM

165. Well good luck with that line of thought here

In my line of work, taking a single study, with the problems this one has, and extrapolating to the general population would be deeply problematic to say the least, I don't care where it was published.

Trying to point that out as neutrally as possible is only attracting flames for me downthread so I'm done. Good luck!



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #165)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:37 PM

176. Thank you.

as I said before, this is a big fat case of wishful thinking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #157)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:09 PM

170. There probably will be, now that someone's done this one

Lots of great discoveries have come from questioning conventional wisdom. The question is, will any of the doubters believe them when they happen?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LadyHawkAZ (Reply #170)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:35 PM

174. If there is additional evidence, I will believe it, too.

As it stands, this is contrary to much of what is known about the industry.

I think a lot of this survey is "halo effect". Just like people report going to church much more than they actually do .... porn stars report being happier than they actually are. There is a monetary inducement to fill out the survey in the first place, and the survey is being taken at a place that fulfills their health needs, and the porn actresses would be motivated to tell this institution they are being good happy healthy citizens, in order not to jeopardize their care.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #174)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:45 PM

178. So why will you believe it if they do more

if you're already convincing yourself that they lied this time? Won't you say the same thing next time? The time after that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LadyHawkAZ (Reply #178)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:53 PM

180. No.

Why do you think I will?

I am all about evidence, this study is contrary to everything else I have ever read, and a single study, while interesting, is proof of nothing unless the results can be replicated. Replicate away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #180)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:12 PM

191. Because I believe in facts too

Fact: you have chosen not to believe the study based on the same stereotypes that caused the study to be done in the first place.

Fact: You invented, in the absence of facts, a scenario in which the participants lied to the questioners, although there is no proof or even suggestion of proof present that it ever happened.

Both of those involve a dismissal of the facts presented in the study.

Based on those two facts, I would conclude there is a high likelihood of you having the same reaction when another study replicates the results. Your reaction this time was not based on the facts presented in the study, so there is no reason to believe that it would be so next time. That's why.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LadyHawkAZ (Reply #191)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:36 PM

197. You do? what you call facts are only your assumptions, based on ...... nothing, really.

You don't know what my belief is formed from. You leap to a judgement about my beliefs without knowing anything about me.

Good luck with that. Have fun with your assumptions.

Fact: You invented, in the absence of facts, a scenario in which the participants lied to the questioners, although there is no proof or even suggestion of proof present that it ever happened.


You don't know much about polling. Read up on the "halo effect". You will learn something new.

The study does not present facts, it presents opinions of its participants. What is does not do is:

1) Prove that this sample group is representative of the industry as a whole, as the women were induced to participate by a financial prize, thereby creating a non-random sample.

2) That financial prize was free services at the health facility where they took the survey.

3) This creates motivation to have those necessary health services think positively about them, and a possible inducement to lie to create that impression.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #197)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:44 PM

198. ...

sounds like monster wishful thinking.


I think a lot of this survey is "halo effect".


this study is contrary to everything else I have ever read


porn stars report being happier than they actually are.


the porn actresses would be motivated to tell this institution they are being good happy healthy citizens, in order not to jeopardize their care.


Exactly as I stated it. Have fun with your assumptions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LadyHawkAZ (Reply #198)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 11:00 PM

199. and why do you think this study is true?

What do you know about the world of scientific studies?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #199)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 11:27 PM

200. I don't

I think it's likely true but would like to see a more in-depth study done. I'm inclined to believe it because slut-shaming stereotypes like the ones that triggered the research do tend to be wrong- wishful thinking, if you will, based on the wrongheaded idea that no woman is truly happy having sex unless it's within a monogamous marriage, and will only seek it out if she's mentally damaged in some way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #34)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:35 PM

51. Out of curiosity, what would it take to convince you?

I'm not saying that you're wrong; I'm simply wondering what might have to be true before you changed your mind on the subject.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #51)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:46 PM

159. More studies that replicate the results.

and perhaps control better for variables.

Since the study creates a contrary stance to most other available information to date, it might be an outlier, it might have bad methodology.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #159)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:52 PM

162. Terrific answer

Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #34)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:53 PM

61. Is that like Monster Raving Looney?

I don't adnastanda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #34)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:51 AM

76. lots of people do porn nowadays from all walks of life. not always for money

 

People like getting their funk on and being an exhibitionist. Disclaimer there are videos and pics of myself on the net and i loved the making and still getting to see them. Human sexuality comes in allnforms and as long as its two or more consenting adults who cares.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to loli phabay (Reply #76)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 11:55 AM

97. Pics or it didn't happen!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gore1FL (Reply #97)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 01:06 PM

109. lol not sure you could handle them honey

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to loli phabay (Reply #109)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 08:56 PM

182. At my age, probably not! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to loli phabay (Reply #76)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:49 PM

160. There are those who do it for fun, and those who do it because they are desperate for cash.

have no employable skills, or have a drug habit to feed, or any other economic pressures that might ensue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #160)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:37 PM

175. yup it runs the gamit. some for fun some for cash some for desperation

 

Though i dont know why anyone pays for it anymore when there is so much free stuff of all sexual proclivities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to loli phabay (Reply #76)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 07:36 PM

210. DU3 is all about transparency

C'mon, fess up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #34)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 01:51 PM

111. until you get into home made porn like Paris Hilton...

Ever see the sex tape she made? She was REALLY into it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #34)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:06 PM

169. The study may or may not be "valid"..

... but I'm pretty sure your opinion is a sweeping generalization based on no research whatsoever pulled straight from your ass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sendero (Reply #169)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:40 PM

177. a leap of faith on your part

on the efficacy of your own personal belief system.

As you know nothing about me or my knowledge or experience.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #177)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:46 PM

190. I iknow your words..

... and they say a lot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sendero (Reply #190)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:24 PM

193. Read my words back to me.

A useful exercise.

I suspect you don't understand them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #34)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 06:53 PM

209. So Look what you're doing here- reflexively insulting these people.

Maybe you don't like them and what they choose to do, but you should be able to accept that (at least according to this one study) many of them like themselves and dont have a problem with their choice of careers.

No need to belittle and shame porn workers just because they're messing with a preferred, if false, narrative.

I think the fact that the general public is increasingly more tolerant and less judgmental, helps.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #209)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 09:57 PM

211. No, I'm not.

I make no judgment about what they chose to do, at all.

I just think this single study is very questionable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:21 PM

38. So then, we're all fucked

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kennah (Reply #38)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:22 PM

41. LOL.

maybe

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kennah (Reply #38)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 12:06 AM

64. Or we should be

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:33 PM

48. I've never worked in porn, but I've been screwed at lots of jobs. Does that count?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #48)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:51 PM

59. i was wondering what the self esteem and happiness amount

amongst grad students was when i read this

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #59)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 12:52 AM

70. LOL!

All I can think, when I read threads like this, is that there are plenty of dehumanizing, debasing, and exploitative jobs out there, many of which entail little or no nudity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #48)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 12:25 PM

104. Do you have a video or pics of it happening?

if not it doesn't count.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:38 PM

52. An enlightening read

thanks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SariesNightly (Reply #52)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:49 PM

57. welcome

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:53 PM

60. I just saw this study mentioned on Jezebel

Very interesting!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 11:59 PM

62. Sure, now they are. It's a legitimate career path.

 

Years ago it was kidnap victims, hookers, runaways and junkies that did porn. Take a look at Debbie Does Dallas. Debbie was kooked out of her mind on meth and the other girls were a mess.

Now days it's a legitimate career choice for women. They get paid very well and treated respectfully. Why wouldn't they feel good about themselves? They even get their own awards show now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrSlayer (Reply #62)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 12:01 AM

63. you may have a point there. a well regulated industry, especially with its

STD screening etc may contribute to women feeling safe in the career

also attitudes towards sex and sexuality has changed

though, i really doubt that we've ever known for sure who has comprised the porn industry

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #63)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:47 AM

75. the industry has also changed with the internet with amateur porn everywhere

 

If people didnt enjoy doing it there wouldnt be so many amateurs posting their own flicks online.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 12:16 AM

66. Revelation! Life sucks for everyone!

 

Why anyone would be happier waiting tables or cashiering over having sex (did you hear me I said having sex!) in a well-regulated industry is beyond me (negative points to anyone who replies with a remark that doesn't recognize that I just said A WELL-REGULATED INDUSTRY. If you don't know what that means go join the GOP).

Porn is here to stay. Maybe women should claim it, and then use it to carve out a more powerful niche in society by exploiting those poor men who spend tons on it.

I guess first they have to get over patriarchy "sex is dirty and women are sluts" propaganda, and create a new paradigm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eyes of the World (Reply #66)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:57 AM

81. i think men and women should both be involved in protecting workers

in all industries.

this for me applies to porn and prostitution and other sex work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 12:34 AM

69. very, um, interesting. haha

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 02:14 AM

72. Seems like a good place for some words from

the eminently wise and much missed Dr. Carl Sagan:

"The method of science is tried and true. It is not perfect, it's just the best we have. And to abandon it with its skeptical protocols is the pathway to a dark age."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hifiguy (Reply #72)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:55 AM

80. there was another study recently released that said

that not only do we not agree with scientific results when it goes against our beliefs, but in fact it makes us stronger in our original beliefs

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #80)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 02:05 PM

114. I've seen that discussed here and on Andrew Sullivan's site.

I think one's reaction depends on one's degree of devotion to the scientific method. But there is nothing that is ever going to change the mind of a "true believer" for whom evidence is irrelevant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hifiguy (Reply #114)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 05:37 PM

145. pretty much

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 05:59 AM

77. I think a study should be made on people who like to watch bad acting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #77)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:02 AM

82. "Hey, What are you do-ink?" "Oh, Oooooooooooooooooooooooooo"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #77)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:09 AM

86. i think there is actual a lot more data on people who view porn

than on actors in porn

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:04 AM

83. Interesting, and suggests that porn is not really "exploitation".

I guess the moral is, if you don't like porn, don't buy it, and don't appear in it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #83)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:08 AM

85. i think all work can be exploitative

to me this suggests that it depends on the individual and their particular circumstance

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #85)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 02:03 PM

112. Bingo. I'd say that the folks who work for minimum wage

at Wal-Mart or in sweatshops are infinitely more exploited than a woman who runs her own porn production company.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #85)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:02 PM

167. +1

The work that is least exploitive is the work in which there is a skills shortage, so only a few people are capable of doing it... like porn.

You can get paid what you demand because there isn't a boatload of competition for your job.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #83)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 11:15 AM

94. It's exploitation if the workers don't own the means of production!

Or is that reproduction?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #83)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 12:29 PM

105. I think thats a good moral for many things in like

Gay Marriage and Abortion come to mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 11:01 AM

93. A small, self-selected sample out of how many professional and amateur internet porn "stars"?

Interesting but I'm not so sure its super conclusive....

Disclaimer: its been many years since I took stats but from what I can recall, it would be frowned on by statisticians to make definitive conclusions from one study with many questions about the sample population.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #93)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 11:59 AM

98. The methodology report is actually good about listing the limitations of the study

with the biggest one being that the results are not generalizable. IOW, the results stand for this group of participants only.

That puts it in the category of "intriguing," meaning file away this study as a reference point to use when comparing results of other studies of the porn industry but don't treat the results as reflective of the experiences of all porn actors.

Although this study provides valuable information on porn actresses, several limitations should be pointed out. First, random sampling was not used in recruiting porn actresses or the matched sample, which reduces the generalizability of the findings. Pornography actress participation rate is unknown because the size of the population is largely unknown. AIM tested approximately 1,200 performers a month, and it was estimated that there are 1,200 to 1,500 performers working in Los Angeles County (Kaiser Daily HIV/AIDS Report, 2004), but these numbers fluctuate and there was no way to distinguish between actresses working for major production companies, cyberporn sites, or both. Essentially, actresses working for production companies must be tested once every 28 days to legally work in Los Angeles County. Others working for cyberporn sites are not required to get tested but may choose to do so for different reasons. AIM was one of dozens of facilities where individuals could go for testing. AIM had a large number of clients from the adult entertainment industry because the organization had many employees who had worked in the pornography industry or had extensive experience with it. There is not a registry where performers have to be licensed, so there is no accurate way to calculate exactly how many performers there are at a given time. It is certainly possible that there was a self-selection bias such that those who chose to participate were different from those who chose not to participate. This is an important methodological issue, but it should be pointed out that although there has been interest in the characteristics of pornography actresses for decades, there has been a lack of studies because of the difficulty in accessing this population (Abramovich, 2005). With regard to the matched sample, university and community samples were combined to gather a comparison group to control for age, ethnicity, and marital status. Although the matched group may not represent the typical woman because of the sampling procedures that were used, their responses were similar to other studies with regard to measures of sexual behaviors and attitudes (e.g., Breyer et al., 2010; Lindley, Barnett, Brandt, Hardin, & Burcin, 2008; Wells & Twenge, 2005), self-esteem (e.g., Baranik et al., 2008), quality of life measures (e.g., The WHOQOL Group, 1998), and alcohol and drug use (Johnston et al., 2011). Thus, the matched sample does appear to be a representative sample of typical responses of women found in national-level studies.
A second issue has to do with the definition of a porn actress. The Internet has greatly changed the scope of pornography in terms of how it is produced, presented, and viewed. These are all important factors that have changed since the advent of the widespread availability of pornography on the Internet. Today, it is possible to use a camcorder to film oneself having sex, upload it to the Web, and charge users to view it. Podlas (2000) suggested that a gender power shift has occurred because of the Internet such that women who emigrated from the traditional sex industry now operate successful cyberporn sites where they have gained more control of salary, work environment, and flexibility in scheduling. The Internet has created more opportunities for entrepreneurial women interested in a career in pornography and may represent an economically rational career choice for some women (Podlas, 2000; Strossen, 1995). The characteristics of women who run their own cyberporn sites may be different from actresses who are hired by production companies. Thus, the findings from this study should not be extrapolated to all female sex industry performers.
Third, some of the measures were problematic. Some measures used for sexual behaviors and attitudes were single-item indicators with unknown validities and reliabilities. As an example, participants were asked if they were victims of CSA without further clarifications or definitions. Thus, it is quite possible that a given behavior in a particular situation may have been perceived as CSA by one individual but not by another. Another issue with regard to measures is that education was not examined. Education has been found to be related to a variety of sex-related constructs and would have been a sound matching variable, and its inclusion should be strongly considered in future studies.
This study represented a systematic investigation that reported responses of porn actresses across a variety of domains and compared them to a matched sample. The characteristics of porn actresses have been largely assumptive, although much debate has surrounded the issue. Perhaps this study can provide some information that can be used to make informed decisions regarding porn actresses, rather than rely on stereotypes from sources lacking empirical data. Assumed stereotypes concerning this group of individuals were not found, as the damaged goods hypothesis was not supported. The majority of indicators of recent functioning suggested that porn actresses are not impaired compared to the matched sample with regard to CSA rates, quality of life, self-esteem, and recent drug use, and that they appear more similar to women not employed as porn actresses than previously thought.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gormy Cuss (Reply #98)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 12:08 PM

100. Agreed on all points but it hasn't stopped the OP and 95% of poster on this thread from generalizing

about ALL porn "stars".

Furthermore I reiterate that the study IS interesting (I also made that observation).



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #100)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 12:19 PM

102. no one industry is fully of happy people. or people with high self esteem

all i have said, is that as a group, they seem no more or less damaged than the rest of us

are there damaged people in porn ? yes. are there damaged people not in porn? also yes

certainly one study in any field is not definitive. however it is certainly much better than the huge assumptions we make about people in sex-work

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #102)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:11 PM

149. With all due respect, its hard to extrapolate any hard data from this study.

Its a small sample of voluntary responses.... Its not particularly sound.

Redqueen is right, a study, any study, from the right that was similarly structured would be laughed off DU.

But this subject is one of DU's faves so this study's inherent flaws are ignored.

Regardless, I would be very interested in getting real data on this. My work with abused women personally has lead me to a different conclusion than this "study" so anything that furthers real understanding into this industry would be most welcome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #149)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:12 PM

150. a study is not from the left or the right

it is a peer reviewed process published in a academic journal in social science

not a huffpo or jezebel opinion piece

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #150)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:41 PM

156. I mean presented from left wing or right wing sources.

We like you. DU likes porn. So we approve of this study, even as its flawed.

Then even pointing out its flaws becomes tangled with the topic (that DUers love) even if one tries to stay neutral on it all.

If a similarly constructed study was re-posted here from FR (instead of by a lovely DUer that we all love), and the study said that ALL porn stars are severely damaged, that similarly constructed study would have been completely taken apart here on DU (and rightly so) regardless of who initially published it.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #156)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:46 PM

158. yes, this is probably true

since apparently science does little to convince people of outcomes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #158)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:49 PM

161. Okay. Whatever. Take the study and run with it.... nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #163)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:02 PM

168. You purport to be a social scientist in real life but are pushing the notion that this single study

should now be taken on faith?

Okay. I'm not the one in science denial.

I'm not a scientist but in my line of work, if I were to take it as proven that a single, smallish, study with the flaws that this one has should be generalized to a population would land me in trouble immediately.

I don't know of any credible scientist who would automatically agree with generalizing from a single study. Let alone this one. You've certainly put your professional reputation on the line here with your unequivocal support of this - its almost verging on scientific bias.

YMMV. I meant it sincerely to you as well. Good luck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #158)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:55 PM

164. this is very, very limited science.

Drawing an outcome based on this single study alone is wildly premature.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #164)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:56 PM

166. it's a lot better than drawing your outcomes from stereotypes

don't you think?

which is where the damaged good hypothesis comes from. Mackinnons stereotypes of women in porn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #166)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:50 PM

179. There is more than that.

Nothing in depth, of course, and this is the first, and hopefully there will be more.

but much prior studies, smaller samples, previous explorations indicate something different.


At present, very little is known about the actual characteristics of porn actresses. The limited amount of information from individual actresses that does exist is in the form of personal reports (Lovelace, 1980), case studies (Faludi, 1999), anecdotal evidence (Campbell, 1990; Gittler, 1999; Strossen, 1995; Wilkenson, 1994), and qualitative studies with small sample sizes (Abbott, 2000; Stoller, 1991; Stoller & Levine, 1993), which have provided both positive and negative accounts. Stoller (1991) and Stoller and Levine (1993) conducted ethnographic investigations using interviews of a few actors, producers, and writers in the pornography industry and reported that all participants were hostile or ambivalent toward accepted social conventions, lacked employment options, and had experienced CSA. The most extensive study on women in the adult entertainment industry was conducted by Abbott (2000), who interviewed 31 actresses. Abbott's qualitative investigation examined motivations for becoming a pornography actress and factors associated with staying in the business. The study indicated that the primary reasons for entering the adult entertainment industry included money, fame and glamour, freedom and independence, opportunity and sociability, and being naughty and having sex. With regard to the sexual aspect, a career in pornography provided actresses an opportunity to go against the norms of acceptable sexual behavior. Similarly, money was the primary factor for keeping actresses involved in the industry because other jobs with the same amount of freedom and flexibility were difficult to find. The fame and glamour aspect of being a performer as well as admiration from fans were also important incentives to keep actresses in the industry. Although the study did provide some information on the motivations for beginning and continuing a career as a pornography actress, no issues regarding other characteristics of the women were investigated, and the small sample size restricted generalizations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #179)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 11:48 AM

204. so you are willing to believe the damaged hypothesis

when it comes from much smaller anecdotal evidence but not when it is shown that it maynot be accurate in larger, data driven study

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #204)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 11:55 AM

205. why do you keep calling women damaged? as if they are only goods. please stop. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #205)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 02:28 PM

206. OH MY GOD. can you people read? this study is trying to prove the damaged goods hypothesis

wrong.

it's hardly my theory or my beliefs.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #149)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:20 PM

184. I'll go out further on the limb and state that one can't extrapolate ANYTHING from this study.

Last edited Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:56 PM - Edit history (1)

One can note that this survey shows that not all porn actors have lower self esteem than a similar population and not all porn actors are survivors of CSA. Both of those are in contrast to other studies and/or assumptions of this population and for that reason and the generally transparent methodology this study deserves some attention. However, because of the convenience sample and the lack of depth in the asking about the issues, this survey speaks only for itself.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gormy Cuss (Reply #184)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:32 PM

186. Yes well clearly SOME things are DU approved for scientific rigor, and not others nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #93)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 12:44 PM

107. Interesting choice for a subject line, given how incredibly narrow the focus.

So declarative, even going so far as to put 'no' in all caps.

Interesting. I wonder what would be said of such tactics when used to spin issues that liberals don't contort into libertarians about.

Factory workers: NO less satisfied with working conditions than the rest of us
(Then in the small print: Self reported survey of workers in non representative sampling *excludes sweatshop laborers)


And did it really take over 12 hours and 90 posts before anyone remarked on its extreme limitations?

Wow!

(Just kidding... I am the opposite of surprised.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #107)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:17 PM

118. From the link in your sig

which you are presumably sharing as a representative sample:
http://skeptifem.blogspot.com/p/sex-industry-harm.html

To examine the mental health of women who are engaged in prostitution, the characteristics of the process of prostitution must be understood. According to previous studies, prostitution is essentially a multi-traumatic phenomenon. First, women in prostitution may occasionally be involved in violence.3 A recent study of 854 women in prostitution in 9 countries reported that 70 - 95% of the women experience physical assault, among which 60 - 75% had been raped. Similarly in Korea, where prostitution is illegal, prostitutes experience sexual and physical violence. In a study of 100 Korean women in prostitution, 96% of respondents answered that they experienced physical danger from weapons, physical violence, and injury from rape.


http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/macro/map-the-day-the-prostitution-economy
Between 40 and 42 million people around the world are prostitutes



Bless your heart, your concern for the scientific method is noted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LadyHawkAZ (Reply #118)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:23 PM

122. Where is my OP stating things in all caps, hm?

Did I ever say "Prostitutes: ALL of them are X Y or Z"?

No, I haven't. Because I know to leave out the privileged few.

I don't focus on the privileged workers, in any industry, to make my points.

Unless of course I'm comparison them to the ones who need help and representation.

Because as all progressives know, it is those most in need of representation and advocacy who are the most often ignored.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #122)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:26 PM

123. True. Thread titles like "Prostitution is Violence"

are not the same at all because the caps were in the right place.



Again, your concern is noted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LadyHawkAZ (Reply #123)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:32 PM

124. My personal opinion about an industry is not analogous to a narrow 'study' posted with a misleading

title.

This isn't presented as opinion. This is presented as a fact.

That you and so many others are choosing not to acknowledge how misleading the title and study are is also not surprising.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #124)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:37 PM

127. That you and others will find some reason to discredit a study

no matter how many it interviews, if the conclusions do not match the myth, is not surprising to anyone either. So tell me: how many would need to be interviewed before you'll accept the idea that they might be right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LadyHawkAZ (Reply #127)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:43 PM

129. You think the sample size is the problem?

Nevermind. I'm done here.

No other similar story about workers would get this unquestioning response here.

This is shameful

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #129)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:49 PM

133. 'my bad for reading what you wrote

Interesting choice for a subject line, given how incredibly narrow the focus.


Factory workers: NO less satisfied with working conditions than the rest of us
(Then in the small print: Self reported survey of workers in non representative sampling *excludes sweatshop laborers)

And did it really take over 12 hours and 90 posts before anyone remarked on its extreme limitations?


Next time I will take your advice and assume that you didn't really mean what you said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LadyHawkAZ (Reply #127)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:59 PM

138. It's the Faux Snooze effect.

You see it in all "true believers" including the creationists and the climate change deniers. There can never be enough evidence, though it be piled as high as Mt. Everest, to convince people that they are completely wrong about what they believe to be true. Knowledge has to be based on objective and extrinsic evidence and facts deduced therefrom which do not contradict the evidence. Belief needs no such trivialities.

The essence of science is a healthy skepticism. Skepticism is anathema to the believer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #124)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:50 PM

134. Anyone who submits a scientific study

to a peer-reviewed journal will always describe the methodology used and the limitations thereof. There is no such thing as an absolutely comprehensive study of anything, especially in the social sciences. Are you really that unfamiliar with how the peer-review process works in academic literature? If so, your opinions are meaningless. One cannot simply go out and look for things that confirm your bias.

A scientist, as opposed to someone who already has decided on the answer they want, starts with an attitude of "What is going on out there? Since I don't know, what is the best methodology to apply in order to obtain objective data?" Answers first and questions later is the methodology used by Faux Snooze.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #124)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:54 PM

136. Stating that A is equal to B is NOT an opinion, that's you expressing something as fact.

Something that you entirely choose to ignore. Your issues with the OP is hypocrisy at its finest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #107)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 05:41 PM

146. the no in all caps was actually a typo, that i didnt bother to correct

because i really didn't think it indicated anything. so when i re-posted and it auto-suggested this title, i didn't fix it.

the limitations are not EXTREME, unless you dont read social science literature at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #146)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 05:56 PM

147. Point taken re: all caps. It seemed since it was in both posts it was intentional.

As for the limitations, was the previous poster correct that there was no indication re: whether respondents were amateur/webcam vs pros with major production companies?

I'd say such lack of granularity presents more than an incidental problem with the results.

Please excuse me for not responding further. I sincerely did not want to get dragged into this latest round of apologia for this $13 billion industry. I also would like to avoid having any 'Google experts' type insults hurled my way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #147)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:24 PM

153. "Google experts"...

That`s rich, coming from someone who thinks Wordpress is an academic source!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 11:21 AM

95. A similar observation, as a new resident of Nevada -

my husband and I were driving around this weekend after a trip to Mt. Charleston, about 45 minutes outside of Las Vegas. We decided to go to Pahrump, which is the closest place with legal brothels. We stopped a bit before Pahrump when we saw a brothel was nearby.

We went in simply because we were curious and we had never been inside a brothel. We were warmly welcomed by the ladies, even as we made it clear we were not going to be customers. A wonderful well-spoken girl took us on a tour of the facility and told us a bit about the regulations in place.

We felt the girls (and women, as some were way older than I am) were treated very well and had very sex-positive ideas. Our host simply told us she likes being sexual, flirting with men, and having sex. Most only stay for a few weeks at a time. All have weekly testing, then a monthly physical, and a yearly HIV test. Condoms are mandatory. Each lady has her own boundaries and each lady is an independent contractor. They make their money and then go back to their permanent residences and either return or not, as they choose.

My stance on this is basically that we are ok paying someone for his skill in throwing a football or dunking a basketball (and there are plenty of damaged athletes), but somehow we are not ok if a woman or man uses her/his skills for sexual activity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 12:06 PM

99. Not buying it

 

Colin Quinn had a great line concerning this, but I can't repeat it here!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to x2 vancouverite (Reply #99)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:21 PM

120. Personal myths over scientific evidence, wow that worked before....

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 12:14 PM

101. Well she looks happy

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 12:40 PM

106. This is a great OP

I have been very busy at work (that time of year with finals and everything), but want to comment on this later.

Good job, LLP!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to obamanut2012 (Reply #106)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:21 PM

121. Yep

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to obamanut2012 (Reply #106)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:10 PM

148. i wrote another one on research methodology

would love your two bits aka expert opinion

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021897079

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #148)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 12:36 AM

201. OOOOOOO

Will read first thing in the morning!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:33 PM

125. After carefully reading this op and all the responses, I am shocked to find there is

porn on the internet!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to retread (Reply #125)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:55 PM

137. There's gambling in the back room at Rick's, too!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:12 PM

151. Lol

 

What a crock of BS!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Systemshock212 (Reply #151)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:12 PM

171. Care to elaborate?

Any basis for your deep and wise critique, Einstein?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:34 PM

154. Uh oh. Some of the agenda pushers won't like that very much

That's the thing about social science and peer reviewed research: it has a way of pushing against the current of conventional wisdom and screwing up the agenda pushers' talking points.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:27 PM

173. Is this a celebration of porn stars... or an indictment of the rest of our psyches?

Look I'm 49. If I don't have a few psychological barnacles on my hull by now, I probably ain't been living enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:44 PM

189. ...



TYY

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:18 PM

192. I dunno this is like the argument that prostitutes like their job

Of course they will say they do.

And there are those that want to believe that.

But like most of us, I would imagine I would be miserable if I had no other way to make money.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #192)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 02:31 PM

203. this study is not really about job satisfaction

it's more particularly testing self-esteem, happiness and refuting the damaged goods hypothesis

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:26 PM

194. It's complicated

 

The repression and the exploitation of sexuality represent two sides of the same coin. In condemning pornography and fighting for its prohibition, anti-porn feminists see pornography as a business that exists to exploit women and gay men for the purpose of making certain business tycoons fabulously rich, a situation they see as no different from using the repression of sexual expression to control, manipulate, and punish women. I understand where they're coming from, and the reasons for their flavour of sexual repression is to block this sort of exploitation rather than to control women for their benefit. That said, I disagree wholeheartedly with their solution. The best way to protect people in the porn industry (and sex workers in general) from exploitation without restricting civil liberties or encouraging the repression of sexual expression is through organization via the labour movement and appropriate regulations from a progressive or a social democratic government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 12:45 AM

202. Well, that's good. It's nice to have

a career you love...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Original post)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 06:40 PM

207. This has been an interesting thread. Any discussion of porn always starts a flamewar!

I got flamed for posting some articles from AlterNet that raised issues about porn and its effect on our sexuality, especially young people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LongTomH (Reply #207)

Sat Dec 1, 2012, 06:45 PM

208. all this study is really doing is really significantly questioning

the damaged hypothesis, which i don't see many people get out of this thread

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread