“Every
porn scene is a record of people at work,” begins Heather Berg’s Porn Work:
Sex, Labor, and Late Capitalism, a deeply researched book examining the nuances
of labor within the adult industry. This declaration echoes the familiar
rallying cry that “sex work is work,” but Berg immediately complicates it.
“Sometimes it is also something else,” she adds. “Again and again, porn workers
told me that they left straight (non-sex-work) jobs for porn because they
‘hated working,’” she explains. It was an escape from the nine-to-five grind.
Then again, many porn workers also told her that it was “a job,” “a gig,” one
with all the potentials for monotony, as well as exploitation, that come with
any job or gig.
In her
interviews with 81 performers, managers, and crew members across genres—from
mainstream to amateur, and in gay, straight, queer, and feminist
productions—she found reports of enjoyment and hatred, “pleasure and tedium.”
These tensions are familiar to work in general, because the adult industry “is
not exceptional,” argues Berg.
That
said, porn is exceptional for being steeped in societal shame and taboo. It
bucks the convention that sex should be “private and free,” as Berg puts it.
Porn also appears to fail to conform to dated office-job cliches of staid
cubicle farms and sober TPS reports. But, in fact, Berg shows how the
experiences of porn workers are revealing of a broader “moment in late
capitalism.” Workers of all sorts are “called to ‘do what you love.’”
Authenticity “is a work requirement and one that can serve to extract more from
workers, for less.” The many tensions in porn work fundamentally reflect the
“deep contradictions at the core of (late) capitalism,” she argues. Workers
flee the constraints of traditional jobs only to “find precarity on the other
side.” People seek pleasure in work, which both makes it more “livable but also
gets us to do more of it.”
Porn
workers have long faced the realities that are now considered indicative of a
new economy in which “intimate life is increasingly brought to the market;
individual workers, rather than employers or the state, assume the economic and
health risks of doing business; and a hypermobile gig economy is eclipsing more
stable ways of working.” Having lived for decades in this “new” reality, porn
workers have “found ways to hack and reshape its conditions for as long,” she
writes. This includes everything from mutual aid for out-of-work performers to
whisper networks of insider information around everything from unscrupulous
talent agents to the potential side-effects of herbs used for erectile
dysfunction. Berg also points to organizing efforts, like the recent formation
of the BIPOC Adult Industry Collective, which seeks to address industry racism.
Berg has
a sober view of the limitations of “hacking” and “reshaping” within capitalism.
These efforts are “not always transformative—sometimes intervening means
ascending hierarchies rather than dismantling them,” she writes. Many of these
“strategies chip away at the status quo, even as they sometimes also maintain
it.” Berg argues for the importance of acknowledging sex work as work, and
improving the conditions of that work as a “politics for the meantime,” while
also crucially and radically imagining a post-work reality. The epilogue of the
book is titled, simply: “Fuck Jobs.” The phrase was taken from an interview
with performer Conner Habib who said, “I don’t like the idea of jobs. The most
obscene thing is ‘working for a living.’”
Jezebel
spoke with Berg by phone about the nexus of labor and pleasure, and what porn
reveals about the future of work.
JEZEBEL:
You write of an interesting tension between the need to recognize sex work as
work and many of your interviewees expressing that they chose porn because they
“hated working.” Can you explain that seeming contradiction?
Heather
Berg: This tension can’t really be resolved. What became really important for
me in the book was to frame the reality that porn work not only is work but
also feels like work, often in its tediums and hierarchies and forms of
exploitation. In all of that, it is a job like other jobs.
It’s
also true that it is absolutely a way to refuse other, and worse, straight
jobs. That is a tension that can’t and shouldn’t be resolved. It became really
important for me to frame that tension not as a miscalculation on workers’
parts, but instead as struggle. It’s this thing that so many workers in sex
industries and outside of them are grasping at—the hope of doing something that
feels more autonomous, that feels more pleasurable. There are these moments in
porn where that delivers and other moments where it feels very much like the
kind of retail, food service, and office work that people leave behind.
J : Your
book is full of these tensions. One of them is the subject of authenticity,
which can be both an extractive demand and a sustaining part of porn work. Can
you explain what you found there?
HB : On
the one hand, as various labor scholars have been writing for the last twenty
years or so, we’re in this moment in which more and more workers are expected
to do their jobs not because they need money but because they love them,
because they feel like a vocation. For you and I, in journalism and academia,
we have a much longer history of that, and there are all sorts of workers for
whom that’s not new, that’s not a product of neoliberalism. But that’s always
been the case for various forms of service work, domestic labor, teaching, and
certainly for unpaid care work in the home. Those expectations around the
affect that you bring to work are being democratized where all workers are
expected to perform authenticity.
That’s
more intense sometimes in sex industries because the weight is so far in the
direction of disproving anti-sex worker ideas that people only do sexual labor
because they desperately need the money, and also disproving the idea that the
sex that happens on-set or for in-person work with a client is devoid of any
kind of human connection. One response to that, particularly among feminists
and queer pornographers, has been to really highlight the authenticity at work
in their scenes and also to demand that performance of performers. It’s a PR
strategy, but it’s also a labor market strategy, because performing
authenticity makes it harder to ask about pay, it makes it harder to say you
need to go home at the end of the day. That can create really significant
burdens for workers. In the parts of the industry in which authenticity is most
prized and also most celebrated by folks on the outside, pay tends to be lowest.
That’s a classic dynamic—anyone who has worked for nonprofits or independent
bookstores knows what that feels like.
On the
other hand, authenticity sometimes matters to workers, which is why so many of
us come to these industries in the first place. For autonomy and also for a
sense that you can bring some part of yourself to the job, that the job doesn’t
feel alienating in the classic sense. I want to take that seriously too. These
glimpses of connection between costars and pleasure on the job, they’re not
just disciplining, they don’t just get more work out of people but they can
also be a foundation for organizing and community building. On the individual
level these moments of pleasure can make the workday less bad for people and
that matters. It’s both a thing that gets them to work more and something that
lets us leave a little bit less of ourselves at work.
J : In
the book, you hit at the idea that for viewers the demand for authenticity
might arise from a discomfort with sex work, with commercialized sex. And that
this wish might arise from a place of shame.
HB : Absolutely.
Anti-porn feminists have engineered that shame and consumers absorb it in all
sorts of ways, the idea that having sex for money is bad and that paying people
to have sex for money is maybe even worse. Management’s response to that is to
offer up to consumers products that make them feel ethically safe. There’s this
unholy collaboration between anti-porn feminists and managers, who agree that
money is a bad reason to have sex and who together coordinate, without ever
talking to each other, to in some ways compel workers to pretend to work for
some other reason.
On fan
chat boards you can see all sorts of discussion around people who are “dead in
the eyes” or don’t seem to be into it, or who at conventions don’t seem to
really like their fans. That’s primarily mainstream fans who are demanding a
ton of unpaid labor from performers, either chatting with them on OnlyFans or
Twitter. On the other hand, you have self-identified queer and feminist
consumers who seek out this content, which in some ways does have better
working conditions, but in others is much like buying fair trade coffee. It’s
more for the consumer’s ego maintenance than anything.
J : Similarly,
how does pleasure play into work in the porn context?
HB : Often
the narrative on the part of labor scholarship is that anytime we feel pleasure
at work—whether it’s the Google slide or Casual Fridays, these kinds of cheap
gestures toward worker pleasure—it’s only a transparent effort to try to get
people to work more. Sometimes that’s true. Anyone who has been in a workplace
like that knows how thin it can feel. At the same time, again, I don’t view any
of these processes as only top-down, as only management figuring out better
ways to exploit workers and workers passively accepting that.
The
counter to that, which exists not in contradiction but alongside it, is that
pleasure can make not just work but also life more livable. That matters for
people. That certainly can get folks to work more for less, but there is
something about life under late-capitalism that is profoundly pleasureless and
un-erotic, and that expects workers to grind themselves into dust. In that
context there can be something really resistive about claiming pleasure in your
work day.
J : You
write about the blurred line in porn, increasingly, between life and work.
HB : Another
tension, and the book is full of them, is that folks often come to porn work
with the promise of more money and fewer hours, a job that pays in five or six
hours what they used to make in a week. That’s really crucial for folks dealing
with disability or chronic illness, who have caretaking responsibilities, who
are artists who need time to pursue other things, and also, I always want to
add, just for people who want to work less who don’t necessarily have some
lofty reason but want more time for the rest of their life. Sometimes porn
delivers that, but it does so, like a lot of creative work and gig work, at the
cost of any boundary between your job and your life. That offers some real
benefits to people insofar as much of the work can be done at home. As people
have found during the pandemic, there’s some pleasure in that for some people.
All of that’s true and at the same time it can be really hard never to be able
to clock out. Workers talked about how they navigated these demands where,
unless you have really strict boundaries around your time, you’re never really
on vacation.
You’re
always uploading content to your OnlyFans or updating your subscription site or
quoting fans on social media. People have a lot of smart hacks around that, you
can automate a lot, but it can feel difficult to have any sense of separation.
But that’s not unique to porn, that’s something all sorts of freelancers
identify. I’m not framing that only as something that takes more from people,
there are real benefits. It’s not just a neoliberal managerial perspective to
say that no one wants to go into an office—that’s actually true for people and
I don’t think we should pretend it’s not.
J : What
are some of the issues with looking toward the state for support and
protection?
HB : The
primary consideration here is that employment law is set up to force a choice
upon workers in a really artificial way born out of a very brutal compromise
between industrial labor organizers and capital during the New Deal era. It
forced this choice between autonomy and some semblance of protection. That is
the origin of the distinction between independent contractors and employees and
the longstanding rule that it’s only people designated as employees who are
nominally protected at work. In order to get access to that protection, whether
it’s around anti-discrimination law or occupational health or protections from
wage theft or access to social security, you have to give up control over your
labor, which is why some people have always refused that.
At the
same time, it’s also true that even for people designated as employees, those
protections are slimmer and slimmer by the day and they’ve been so eroded under
neoliberalism. Even at their height, they were only designed to benefit the
white male industrial worker, so they always left out domestic workers, migrant
workers, racialized workers, gendered workers, and sex workers and other folks
in the informal economy. You give up a lot in name in not working under a boss,
but as mainstream workers have learned over the course of the pandemic, plenty
of formal employers can put you at risk with no liability, can lower your pay
with no responsibilities to you. The risks of relying entirely on state
protection are two fold. One, that it forces this choice and, two, the crumbs
you’re given on the other side are so paltry.
J : What
is it about porn work itself that adds an additional challenging dimension to
reliance on the state?
HB : Porn workers, like other sex workers, have had
this longstanding antagonistic relationship to the state because the state
regards sex workers primarily as unruly bodies to be controlled rather than
workers who need workplace protection. There’s this tricky dynamic where
workers often ally with management to resist state interference in ways that
would look very strange to a labor organizer outside sex industries. The
reality is many workers make this calculation that they would rather have no
state intervention than state intervention that treats them solely as vectors
of disease.
You can
see that in the state’s incredibly single-minded focus on STI transmission over
and above all of workers’ mundane health concerns—but also concerns around
discrimination and wage theft—that, if you ask workers, they’re much more
concerned with. Legislators are just obsessed with the idea of rampant HIV
transmission on porn sets, for example. Workers are right that the state’s interventions
there will be violent ones rather than pro-worker ones. On the other hand, it
does create this dynamic that looks like libertarianism from the outside, but I
don’t think is, in which you have workers with no ability to appeal to state
response when their legal rights are violated.
So much
state policy regarding porn work has actively made conditions worse. One
example of that is FOSTA-SESTA, which have not only materially made it harder
for workers to work, but also harder to work independently without giving some
of their pay to management, whether platforms or individuals. It’s also made it
harder to organize.
J : Absent
state assistance, you write about collective and individual struggles in porn
work. What approaches have been most effective?
HB : For
a time, porn workers had really tight networks of mutual care and community and
had figured out ways to take care of each other when the state and employers
had failed to do so. That looks like information sharing, daily acts of mutual
aid, teaching each other how to do the work in ways that are less extractive,
whether that be tips for performing in ways that protect your body or letting
people know how to get out of work with a bad agent.
Now,
with the overwhelming transition to digital, some of the in-person network has
dispersed, but much of that has moved online. In the early days of the
pandemic, so many people were figuring out how to make ends meet and sites like
OnlyFans were oversaturated. Even then, porn workers were sharing information
with either sex workers who had primarily done in-person work before or folks
who were newly out of work in their straight jobs and trying to make some money
on digital sex work hustles. Seasoned sex workers were sharing information on
how to do it safely, how to make money. It was such generosity, even amidst the
labor market compression and scarcity, in ways I don’t think you would find in
many jobs.
J : Recently,
we’ve seen the resurgence of an anti-porn movement targeting tube sites. What
do you make of this in the “porn work” context?
HB : Part
of the problem is that anti-porn campaigners, even those who say they’re trying
to protect workers, don’t talk to them. They have not just inaccurate but also
outdated ideas about how any of this works. If anti-porn campaigners had been
paying attention fifteen years ago when workers were starting to organize
against tube sites, there might have been some possibility of making themselves
useful, if what they actually wanted to do was make it harder for tube sites to
steal content and allow fans to consume sex workers’ labor without paying them.
But we’re not there and, of course, that’s never been their genuine aim.
In this
moment, tube sites are so ubiquitous and sex workers are so crafty, they have
spent years cultivating strategies that make tube sites work for them. Now, the
primary effect of anti-porn intervention into tube sites specifically is to
shut down all of those hacks that workers have already devised. That’s one
issue, the other is the implications this has for legal precedent.
Historically, struggles over free sexual speech have often focused on studios
and traditional managers, but as more and more sex workers have access to class
mobility within the industry through producing their own content, then those
assaults on sexual speech have a direct impact not on some big studio head, but
on sex workers’ own ability to make a living.
J : What
lessons can be drawn from porn workers’ navigation of these tricky tensions
around work, life, authenticity, and pleasure?
HB : First,
porn workers and sex workers more broadly have already been living in the
conditions that are just now hitting other kinds of workers in straight
industries. The kinds of trends that labor scholars and activists are observing
in other fields as a recent crisis have been par for the course for sex workers
since the inception of the work. That is, again, these blurred lines around
life and work, and this total lack of state support for worker safety. It’s
also blurred boundaries around class—we don’t have one tidy community of
workers and another of management that can be easily organized against. Also,
this double bind where we want work that feels pleasurable, but then that
pleasure can be used against us.
All of
these conditions—especially these recent concerns that civilians are just
figuring out, like, “Oh, it’s a problem for Uber drivers that the state doesn’t
see them as workers”—sex workers have been figuring how to survive in spite of
that forever. Straight workers can learn so much from those strategies.
In terms
of what that looks like around surviving state violence and neglect, porn
workers’ strategies around mutual aid, information sharing, and subtle ways of
intervening in their conditions that don’t rely on the protection or permission
of the state are so inspiring. My two cents are that other gig workers would be
served in not asking for recognition and permission, and taking what they want
in less direct ways. In terms of navigating the blurry boundaries between life
and work, it’s less that porn workers have figured out some secret, because
it’s something folks talk about struggling with all the time, and more that
they just remind us that life isn’t better when you have that clear boundary,
necessarily. So many people leave jobs that they did clock into, that weren’t
at home, that had nothing to do with their own desires, and those jobs were
awful too. The main lesson is that work sucks and nobody wants to have a boss.
This
economy is set up to punish people who try to escape that. You can’t have total
autonomy and also security under capitalism. That’s not a porn problem that’s a
capitalism problem. Porn workers reveal the impossibility of that and are also
really smart about how to survive in the meantime.
'Pleasure
and Tedium': What Porn Reveals About the Future of Work. By Tracy Clark-Flory. Jezebel, June 10, 2021.
Porn
Work, Gig Economy, and the Politics of New Labor. Heather Berg writes about
sex, work, and social struggle. She is the author of Porn Work: Sex, Labor, and
Late Capitalism and assistant professor of women, gender, and sexuality studies
at Washington University in St. Louis.
Every
porn scene is a record of people at work. But on-camera labor is only the
beginning of the story. Heather Berg’s new book, Porn Work, takes readers
behind the scenes to explore what porn performers think of their work and how
they intervene to hack it. Blending extensive fieldwork with feminist and
anti-work theorizing, Porn Work details entrepreneurial labor on the boundaries
between pleasure and tedium. Rejecting any notion that sex work is an
aberration from straight work, it reveals porn workers' creative strategies as
prophetic of a working landscape in crisis. In the end, it looks at what porn
has to tell us about what's wrong with work, and what it might look like to
build something better.
Porn Work
: Sex, Labor and Late Capitalism . Connor Habib, Cassandra Troyan, moses moon,
Heather Berg, moderator is Kathi Weeks
Red May TV , May 16, 2021.
Hey,
everyone, Jessie here! As a sex worker and founder and managing editor of
Peepshow Media (a multimedia online magazine featuring news and stories from
the sex industry), one of the most common questions I see around the discussion
of porn is: How can I consume porn ethically?
If you
have been paying attention to what has been happening in the porn industry —
even a little bit — you have probably noticed that being a porn performer isn’t
without its complications.
While
there are a handful of high-profile porn stars who seem to live a life of
excitement and luxury, most performers are making more moderate incomes, and
many are struggling just to make it in an industry that has become
oversaturated by the rise of independent content creation platforms like
OnlyFans. Furthermore, the pandemic has pushed in-person sex workers — like
escorts and strippers — as well as nonprofessionals, to online sex work.
In
addition to the oversaturation of the porn market, there have been many public
allegations of on-set assault that have pushed performers to call for a #metoo
moment within the industry, not to mention a global pandemic that has halted porn
production and made it unsafe for performers to collaborate.
And if
that wasn’t bad enough, banking discrimination has meant that many porn
performers have had trouble accessing their money and in many cases, have had
their accounts shut down. And none of this even takes into account the
considerable social stigma that porn performers regularly face, including
anti-pornography feminism that espouses the inherent harm of all forms of sex
work, including pornography.
And yet,
porn performers provide a valuable service that I would venture to guess most
of the readers of this article have at some time indulged in. A thoughtful
consumer who wants to make sure not to contribute to any of these harms
probably asks themselves a seemingly simple question: How the hell do I
ethically consume porn? To dive into this, I turned to three experts: Dr.
Heather Berg and porn performers Lotus Lain and Lena Paul.
Berg,
assistant professor at Washington University in St. Louis and author of the
book Porn Work: Sex, Labor, and Late Capitalism, points out that when the
question is aimed at the performers themselves, it creates a lot of unpaid work
for performers (thus being antithetical to the aim). She says, “There is a way
that the hope to consume ethically ends up requiring a lot more labor of
performers to convince consumers that they are doing the right thing.”
Lain, an
adult performer and activist within the adult industry says that it is
complicated, in part, because ethics are subjective: “My feelings are, everyone
has a different set of ethics.”
What’s
more, consumption — in porn or any other industry — is complicated. “I wish
that there was one convenient answer to this question,” says porn star Paul.
“It is such a simple question, but the more we unpack it, the more complicated
it becomes.
While
there is no simple answer to this question, here are a few things to consider
when you think about consuming porn more ethically in the future:
Unfortunately,
porn is not ethical just because it is branded so or looks like it was
ethically produced.
In her
interviews of porn performers for her book, Berg says that they quite often
expressed their frustration with working for production companies that were
branded ethical. “Performers had a lot of critiques of feminist and queer
porn,” she says. “It often requires extra and unpaid work to communicate ethics
to consumers.”
This
often includes pre- or post-interviews wherein performers express their
pleasure in the scene or demands other signaling that is ultimately not for the
benefit of the performers. The purpose is to make consumers feel better about
their consumption. “The companies want aesthetic and postproduction add-ons to
convey to the customers that it is ethically safe.”
Lain
points out that scenes with the sort of signaling that make the consumers feel
good because they either are soft-core or make an aesthetic show of consent and
ethics don’t necessarily feel that way to the performers themselves. She says
that even though the scene may feel good to watch, “the actors could have been
underpaid, the location could have been dangerous, etc.”
In
looking for studio porn, both Lain and Paul suggest that consuming your
favorite star’s performances alone won’t give you insight into how they feel.
After all, they are performers.
Instead,
customers can do their research by following performers online and paying
attention to how they talk about their work experiences. Lain suggests,
“Twitter is the best way of finding out how performers feel about working for
particular companies.” She asserts that looking at what people who are not
currently a company’s favorite say will give you a more accurate picture. “Find
out what former favorites feel about the company when they are no longer
favorites,” she says.
Paul
says that if your concern as a consumer is mitigating suffering of individual
performers and you want to make sure that the performers are not being
mistreated, following them and being positively engaged are also good ways to
know. She says, “The biggest way to have ethical consumption is to have a
degree of interaction online, be it with a studio model or independent content
creator." It is important to remember, however, that contacting and
interacting with your favorite performers on their work social media accounts
requires labor on their part and you should be compensating them for their time
— even when your interactions are not sexual in nature.
Another
advantage of following your favorite performers on social media is that they
will show you where they prefer to sell their content. Some platforms take
larger cuts than others, and Berg suggests that everyone ought to be “paying
attention to platforms’ own rate structures and following your favorite
performers to the platforms they prefer.” Or, in other words, Berg says,
“Subscribe to platforms that give performers higher cuts.”
Paul
agrees that trying to pay the models you follow as directly as possible is best
for performers. She reminds us, “As performers, we receive no royalties from
studio porn.” She adds, “The odds of your money going to a model if you buy
porn directly from them are orders of magnitude higher.”
Lain
echoes Paul’s sentiments: “Obviously the most ethical way is to buy it from the
performers.” She is quick to add, “Pay them if you want to see certain things.
Don’t hassle them on their Instagram comments.” Many performers are more than
happy to create custom content when they are being paid for it. They do not,
however, appreciate being told what to do on social media by folks who aren’t
paying them.
In terms
of paying for your porn, Berg also points out that if you have seen a
performer's work that you really like on one of the big tube sites, tipping
them encourages them to continue to create what you like. She says, “If you are
pirating, most performers have a Cash App. You can find that and pay them
directly for content you’ve already seen.”
One last
thing to remember is that not all of your porn budget needs to be spent on
visual prerecorded videos. In Lain’s words: “There are many different ways to
be titillated.” She suggests considering interacting with your favorite
performers on pay sites like NiteFlirt and SextPanther, where you can chat,
text, send pics, and create custom fantasies.
If you
have reasons that make it impossible to pay for your porn, there are other ways
you can be conscious about supporting the performers you admire. On Pornhub,
for example, you can make sure you are only giving your traffic to verified
users (they will have a blue check by their name) so that they get kickbacks
for your view. If you enjoy webcam performances, you can positively contribute
to the room by engaging the performer in conversations that help to keep the
spirits up in the room and encouraging others to tip and help the model reach
her goals. And you can also help to promote the work of your favorite models on
social media by retweeting and sharing their promo tweets if and when
applicable.
Not All
Porn Is Ethical — Here's What You Should Know. By Jessie Sage. Buzzfeed, March
21, 2021.
“Every porn
scene is a record of people at work.” So begins Porn Work: Sex, Labor, and Late
Capitalism, a new book by the Washington University feminist studies scholar
Heather Berg. It’s an arresting statement, at once self-evident yet also likely
to confound many readers. How many people who do not make porn have thought
much about the labor conditions of those who do?
Apparently,
not many scholars. Porn scholarship, Berg writes, focuses overwhelmingly on
“issues of representation and consumption,” on porn as a text rather than as a
workplace. “Labor scholarship, on the other hand, has strenuously avoided
critical engagement with porn and other sex work,” she continues. Thus, Berg
has written a book that seeks to unite these two disparate scholarly fields.
The result is a breathtaking work of scholarship — the product of 81 interviews
Berg conducted with performers, managers, and crew members, the interviewees
ranging in age from 21 to 70 — that challenges preconceived notions and tidy
assumptions on every page.
Intended
less as a traditional ethnography and more as an effort to “bring interviewees’
expertise to bear on porn, sex, and work,” Porn Work builds on deep theoretical
engagement and nearly a decade of fieldwork. Porn as work, Berg ultimately
argues, exemplifies the deep contradictions of late capitalism but also models
a work landscape unlike most others. Contrary to the traditional Marxist
understandings of class position, for instance, porn workers often move between
various positions within the industry, from performer to director to producer
and back again, often doing so rapidly and sometimes simultaneously. Porn
workers have also been navigating precarious workplaces for longer than
laborers in many other industries and job sectors, and thus they have long
grown adept at thwarting management and exercising power in the workplace in
ways that are usually ignored by outsiders committed to imagining porn workers
as powerless and pitiable.
“Everybody
gets used in one way or another,” Dominic Ace, a veteran porn publicist, tells
Berg in one interview. “Whether you’re a secretary, a janitor, whatever. The difference
here is it’s sex.” Perhaps Berg’s most important intervention is that she takes
that last sentence seriously. In many ways, porn work is unexceptional, and
that’s because porn work — like all work — is exploitative and often sucks. But
the presence of sex “brings both particular vulnerabilities and resources —
intensified state violence and stigma on the one hand and the potential for
pleasureful refusal on the other.” Taking pleasure seriously makes it
impossible to treat porn as just a job. “I get to have and give pleasure every
day for my job,” the performer-activist Conner Habib explains to Berg. “Is that
not in some ways a great potential to sidestep ‘I get to give and experience
misery’?”
It’s
striking that so many people’s perceptions of porn are a decade or two out of
date; in fact, as Berg claims, “[t]he porn industry as it has been
traditionally understood does not exist.” While many outsiders imagine a
conventional media landscape with powerful producers and established studios
and a small number of recognizable “stars,” the 2008 financial crisis, combined
with the proliferation of piracy and widespread access to cheap production
technology, has resulted in a “glutted labor market but one that is also open
to a range of workers’ creative interventions.” For many porn workers, the
2010s meant less stability, scarcer profits, a more diffuse performer
community, and greater competition for fewer gigs. However, it also meant the
advent of direct-to-consumer and “interactive” content — often filmed from home
and advertised for free via social media — which has disrupted managers’ power
and eased entry into porn for more workers from more diverse backgrounds.
Berg
begins by describing the “shop floor” for porn performers who work under a director
and a producer. The porn workday starts with workers negotiating the terms of
their labor — the details and boundaries of what they will do. (“No
interviewees reported being forced to perform scenes they had initially
refused,” Berg notes. It’s expensive when performers walk off set, and “with so
many willing workers, there is little reason to cajole unwilling ones.”) Next
comes STI test authentication, paperwork, hair and makeup, and other body
preparations (for instances, douches, enemas, other medicines). Then,
generally, waiting. Long days and delays are common on porn sets — a source of
anxiety or anger for some performers who just want to go home, but also
sometimes an opportunity for community-building and side-hustling.
“It need
not reinforce the conservative idea of a neat distinction between porn sex and
‘real’ sex to acknowledge that most sex on set is labor intensive in ways
off-set sex generally is not,” Berg writes. Performers need to convincingly
manufacture sexual chemistry with a scene partner even if they’re not attracted
to them; they need to avoid reaching orgasm or ejaculation too soon; they need
to pause often for difficult still shots. And they need to learn how to
position their bodies to reduce discomfort, chafing, and repetitive stress
injuries. All of this is work, and all of it takes skill.
There is
also the invisible labor that happens off-camera and off-set, which often
destroys any boundary between work and life. Porn workers (like other gig
workers) need to constantly market themselves, which nowadays means cultivating
a consistent social media presence — a time-consuming proposition, and, when it
involves interactions with fans, one that requires heavy emotional labor. Porn
workers often spend hundreds of dollars a month and countless hours maintaining
their appearances — labor that falls more heavily on “workers who fall outside
the white, cis-feminine norm.” Many now engage in “satellite work,” such as
erotic dance, webcamming, and escort work, which can provide vital income but
is sometimes seen as lower on the “whorearchy” of sex work. Some porn workers
also take on “straight work,” meaning work outside of the sex work sector,
though their visibility often renders them vulnerable to harassment or firing
from which they enjoy no legal protection.
The
varying rates porn workers are paid are highly secretive, but performers are
often aware of disparities in compensation. White, cisgender, and thin
performers generally have an easier time finding work on high-budget studio productions
that pay well; the few performers of color or trans performers who do get cast
in such features often encounter lower pay and demeaning fetishization. Some
non-Black performers refuse to do “interracial” scenes, or even charger higher
rates for them. (Some agents, meanwhile, told Berg that “they disallow
‘interracial’ work in order to maintain what they see is a valuable fan market
of racist consumers.”) Women (cis and trans) who perform in penile-vaginal or
penile-anal intercourse scenes make an average of $800 to $1,000, while cis men
make $300 to $600 for the same scenes (though they make $800 to $1,200 for gay
scenes). Blow jobs and solo masturbation pay less. Performers in so-called
“feminist” productions (supposedly produced in an equitable manner, though this
is much contested) generally make flat fees, usually $200 to $600 per scene.
Some lower-end director-producers told Berg they don’t need to pay male
performers at all, as amateur men would jump at the chance to have free sex
with a “porn star.” Of course, this sort of arrangement undercuts the labor
market for those who depend on the industry for their incomes and other means
of security. “Sex work tourism can be a kind of scabbing,” Berg concludes.
The sex
itself is, predictably, the part of porn work on which most critics and
scholars focus their attention. Berg does likewise, though in an innovative
way, devoting an entire chapter to parsing porn workers’ feelings about
“pleasure [a]s a working condition.” Sometimes porn workers find sex on set to
be physically uncomfortable; others find porn sex not too rough but rather too
tame, perhaps because directors want to “appeal to an imagined feminist
audience.” Some porn workers withhold full effort from a scene or seek to
maintain an emotional detachment from the work, but many do not — either
because a lackluster performance could affect their ability to get future work
or because they find genuine pleasure and authentic fulfilment in the work.
Invocations of “pleasure” and “authenticity” can be a means of managerial
manipulation, a way for bosses to coerce workers into doing free or informal
labor. But the porn workers Berg spoke to demand that their authenticity and
pleasure be taken seriously. “In sex work as elsewhere,” Berg explains, pleasure
can make “work feel less like work. And authenticity claims can be a means of
refusing anti-sex-worker stigma.”
Porn
Work thrives on such ambiguities and contradictions. Many of Berg’s
interviewees discussed porn as a means of real self-expression even as they
critiqued the obsession outsiders have with whether porn is “authentic” or not.
One performer pushed back on the notion that porn is “work” because the term
connotes suffering, but in the same interview acknowledged that there was
plenty of suffering in porn. It’s difficult, Berg admits, to discuss the
authentic pleasure some workers find in porn while also recognizing that, for
most workers, porn is “a way to make do and get by.” Porn is work, then, but
it’s not merely work. Ultimately, Berg concludes, porn workers’ “refusal to
resolve this tension is instructive.” Taking pleasure seriously is vital to
recognizing the ways that workers struggle, win autonomy, and “take something
from porn performance that exceeds what racial capitalism intends.”
As our
rapidly warming, pandemic-ravaged society descends ever deeper into precarity
and despair, many critics, scholars, activists, and artists are in the midst of
a major reevaluation the ethics of work itself, and Porn Work must be
understood as part of this broader trend. Berg credits many sex worker
theorists for creating new ways of thinking about pleasureful subversions of
capitalism; femi babylon, for instance, has urged thinkers to “move beyond ‘sex
work is work’” to “‘sex work is (anti)work.’” Outside of this context,
journalist Sarah Jaffe has just published a deeply reported manifesto titled
Work Won’t Love You Back, while fellow reporter Anne Helen Petersen titled the
epilogue her recent book about burnout “Burn It Down.” Historians like Louis
Hyman have excavated the origins of the workplace as gig-ified hellscape, and
anthropologists like the late David Graeber have decried the resulting rise in
“bullshit jobs.” The legal scholar Daniel Markovits has recently argued that
even elite white-collar workers are increasingly miserable.
Berg’s
argument that porn work is different is persuasive, but such an argument can
also be overstated. Work sucks, and workers across sectors and across borders
are increasingly recognizing the need for radical change. Solidarity depends on
such widespread and mutual recognition. In this context, perhaps Berg’s most
significant contribution to the discourse is to highlight the creative ways
that porn workers have found to resist work.
Porn
workers engage in struggles for control and respect in myriad ways, which Berg
details with laudable attention and care. She writes that she began her
research looking for traditional forms of worker organizing, like union drives
or lobbying efforts, and, though she found plenty of that, her interviewees
ultimately convinced her that these do not represent their strongest means of
resistance.
The
Screen Actors Guild excluded porn workers in 1974, a policy that has remained
unchanged and has been followed by pretty much all of the mainstream labor
movement. And though there have been some attempts at traditional union
organizing, workers told Berg that the more impactful advocacy efforts were
“nontraditional forms of organizing,” such as peer education and building
support systems. These have been vital as new porn workers learn to negotiate
terms and deal with untrustworthy managers. (“It was not uncommon for
non-sex-worker interviewees to suggest that sex workers are not terribly
bright,” Berg writes, “only to later describe a situation in which sex workers
had outsmarted them.”) Mutual aid networks allow porn workers to assist each
other in securing housing and transitioning into straight jobs. Shortly before
Porn Work went to press, for instance, organizers founded the BIPOC Adult
Industry Collective, which engages in a range of mutual aid work — from skill
shares and virtual workshops to transferring money directly to porn workers in
need.
Porn
workers’ struggles for autonomy and respect take place in other areas, as well.
For instance, many resist one-dimensional stereotypes with irreverent social
media presences. The “best thing about twitter,” Vex Ashley tweeted in 2018, is
that “in 1999 you could keep the dream alive your favourite porn girls were
perma-horny, passive, and amenable, but now it’s unavoidable public record that
we’re all basically acerbic, snarky communists who do not stand for bullshit.”
The rise
of social media, as well as the affordability of audiovisual recording
equipment, has also allowed many performers (especially those with large fan
followings) to produce their own scenes. This can enable them to circumvent
industry racism or niche casting, often employing other workers in the process.
Many more use technology like OnlyFans to work on their own, which has rendered
the entire industry less dependent on large production companies. This
democratized access to the means of production has not, however, created a
world with no bosses. Personalized services still frequently require a
middleman; some webcam platforms take massive cuts of performers’ profits, and
(as in the world of straight work) they rely on “algorithmic management.”
State
surveillance can further limit the emancipatory potential of DIY and
direct-to-consumer porn. In 2018, Congress passed the Stop Enabling Sex
Traffickers Act (SESTA) and Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex
Trafficking Act (FOSTA) legislative package, which was pitched as a way to
create legal consequences for websites that facilitate sex trafficking. The
law’s sponsors had framed it as protecting sex workers, but sex workers
themselves were shut out of the drafting process, their insights and objections
ignored. As a result, SESTA/FOSTA have made sex workers less safe, shuttering
websites through which they could screen potential clients, forcing many onto
the streets, and rendering them more vulnerable to the possible violence of clients,
pimps, the police, and — ironically and tragically — traffickers.
In the
world of porn, workers’ distance from fans insulated them to some extent from
the negative impacts of SESTA/FOSTA, but the laws’ “deliberately broad
definition of trafficking” led numerous sites to shut out sex workers,
including video conferencing and payment processing technology. “Google Drive
erased performers’ video files without warning,” Berg recounts, “in some cases
destroying workers’ only scene files.” As with sex work more broadly, this has
led many porn workers back to conventional porn managers.
In the
months leading up to the passage of SESTA/FOSTA, sex workers began to organize
against the legislation, and in the aftermath of its passage many began
providing education for workers rendered vulnerable by the laws and media
training for workers to try to shift the dominant media narrative. More
broadly, porn workers have long had to engage in anti-stigma activism
(especially because the major producers that once spearheaded free-speech
lawsuits now “have a fraction of the power and wealth they once did”). Many
porn workers are forced to fight against discriminatory landlords, stigmatizing
or disrespectful medical care, and even exclusion from basic banking privileges.
The porn
workers Berg interviewed “overwhelmingly” distrusted the state to remedy these
vulnerabilities, in large part because their primary interactions with the
state come in the form of surveillance. Porn workers want occupational health
protections, but policy-makers tend to focus monomaniacally on two areas where
workers largely just want autonomy: HIV prevention protocols and mandatory
condom laws. In California, many legislators fought for a ballot initiative
that would have allowed private citizens to sue “producers” who violate the law
by failing to use condoms during filming; according to porn workers, this would
have left many performer-producers vulnerable to harassment and even given
stalkers access to their personal information. In the face of such unresponsive
regulators, what porn workers want, Berg argues, “is freedom from both state
and employer control.”
This
desire for freedom can be confused with run-of-the-mill libertarianism (a
philosophy commonly attributed to the porn industry), but to Berg’s credit she
refuses to flatten the complexity of porn workers’ critique. Their opposition
is not so much to state intervention as to invasive or carceral state
intervention. It is no contradiction for vulnerable workers to simultaneously
reject state surveillance yet also decry state neglect. Once again, porn
workers’ critique has relevance far beyond porn, or sex work more broadly. In
so many sectors of work, we are well past the point at which the liberal state
— or liberalism itself — could save us. Only an insistence on a radical
redistribution of wealth, power, and control could allow workers to liberate
themselves from bleak and broken work. And only continuous struggle will result
in this radical break.
What
might this look like? One possibility can be found in the title Berg chose for
her epilogue: “Fuck Jobs.”
While
liberals may promote reforms that would classify porn workers as “employees”
and thus eligible for certain wage and health protections, Berg argues that
this would “represent a backward-looking attempt to bring a few more workers
into a broken category (and one that, again, some workers do not want).” Porn
work does not track easily on the law’s artificial boundary between private
life and public work, and, in any case, “there is no going back — the
conditions that created limited security for a privileged subset of mostly
white, male workers in the mid-twentieth century are gone.”
Instead
of fighting for a less miserable system of work, Berg and many of her
interviewees adopt a resolutely anti-work perspective. There is something
genuinely disruptive about getting paid to exchange pleasure, Berg writes. “It
is an exchange that beckons a postwork utopia in which guaranteed annual
incomes replace the compulsion to work and pleasure seeking takes the place of
drudgery.”
Berg’s
three-page-long epilogue does not comprehensively lay out what precisely this
utopia might look like, or how exactly we might get to it, but this was not her
project. Rather, canny readers can glean from her work “vital clues about
surviving this moment of profound capitalist crisis,” she writes. Excluded from
legal protections and the larger labor movement, porn workers have had to be
creative, to establish their own education and support systems, to buy their
own means of production and employ their friends, to take pleasure seriously.
Berg’s interviewees may have found traditional union organizing to be less
helpful than other means of mutual aid and resistance, yet readers should not
conclude from this that they should disregard unions; indeed, the future of the
planet may well depend on passage of legislation like the PRO Act and the
revitalization of the labor movement. Nonetheless, labor organizers and
political activists should take heed of porn workers’ creativity and success in
disrupting the paradigm of work as misery or monotony.
Porn
work necessarily “reimagines porn, and work,” Berg concludes. And then, quoting
performer-activist Conner Habib: “Okay, fuck jobs.”
Sex Work
as (Anti)Work: On Heather Berg’s “Porn Work” By Scott W. Stern. Los Angeles Review of Books, June 7, 2021.
No comments:
Post a Comment