Notice to male sailors: if you are still in the infantile phase of the male, in which you feel loved only if a woman offers you the body, and you believe that a woman in coming with you gives a "consent", this post could give you bad news.
Having said that, it seems that after 5G and vaccines, it's time for porn. The crusade against porn has already produced an unlikely law in France, which would force porn sites to ask for users' credit cards to verify their age. But there is a lot of talk about it because there are hilarious advertisements that children learn sex on porn sites (forgetting to learn what a "relationship" is, assuming someone has a precise definition) and since in politics one swallow is spring, it doesn't take long to understand that a crusade against online porn is about to start in Italy too.
How can it end?
So, let's start to understand what the economic model of online porn is, that is of modern pornography. So let's see how all "employees" earn, by categories.
Actors and actresses.
None of you have paid for porn in recent years. On any site you go, all the porn you want is free. Since it is very doubtful that actors and actresses can really earn a lot of their films (rights, distribution & co) as happens with cinema, you may have wondered how actors earn.
Here it is simple: they are essentially escorts of all sexes. Prostitution. You may have heard of Trump paying $ 150,000 for one night with a porn star. Why so much when you can find even prettier girls for a lot less? Because she is a porn star, that is, she has her name and is a brand .
You didn't sleep with anyone, you went with Stormy Daniels. Famous pornstar . A phenomenon called "branding", that is, Stormy Daniels has a registered trademark in the male imagination. Just as Lexington Steele is in the American female / gay one, and Rocco Siffredi is a brand in Italy.
In short, these people are porn actors because it is an advertising channel, through which they become "prostitutes with a brand", which is their stage name. They don't care if they make money like they do with cinema, with sales of the film or with distribution rights. This is an old model that no longer works, not for nothing in Italy porn as a sector is dead. (whatever Siffredi says).
The manufacturers are not other advertising companies that help the escorts build their own brand, the brand. If you think of someone like Sasha Gray, for example, remember her name after years of not making films. This means that, by eye and cross, a night with Sasha Gray costs around $ 80-100,000. I say "by eye and cross" because I don't know his price list, and I can only interpolate between the prostitutes / pornstars who ended up in some scandal, and you know the price.
If you have the Sasha Gray price list, do as Totem did, and write to "hoillistinoprezzidiSashaGrey@keinpfusch.net". The message won't come to me, but you will feel like a better person for doing it.
The producers earn in two ways: the first is that the boss occasionally invites the actresses to some party, which then becomes an orgy, and the rich people who go to the party pay for it. Or, if you pay properly, you may also have the stars' "working" personal phone.
So at the production level it is prostitution: the prostitute makes her own brand, or brand, and even the pimp who provides the contact becomes the brand, like "Brazzers".
If you contact them and you have that amount of money to pay, they put you in touch with the actress you want. To obtain the tax exemptions of the artists, these production companies also make the DVD and everything, but it is a mirror for the larks. Hands up who has bought a porn DVD in the past 10 years.
Papponi with a brand that employ escorts with a brand.
This branding is very sophisticated in the sense that they are divided by gender in a very meticulous way (Milf, BBW, etc) and very much reflect the tastes of customers and the offer of prostitutes depending on the type. For example, after the appearance of African billionaires and wealthy African Americans, the interracial exploded, the abundance of BDSM mistress offerings resulted in almost all BDSM porn showing mistresses and very few masters, and so on. . In short, the porn production sector adapts like a glove to the dynamics of prostitution.
Then we go to the websites that take those movies and give them away for free.
Their business model is due to two facts. The first is that they literally invented a technology, what we call CDN. Not that they sell CDN technologies, but the point is that keeping a "pod" of a porn site is quite inexpensive in terms of storage, and uses ONLY the resources you need. Since opex costs are minimized and capex is also low, break even is very simple.
At that point, the site earns through another online prostitution tool, called a "cam girls". It is the telematic equivalent of erotic telephones. Unbranded prostitutes, of all ages and types and social backgrounds, show up on webcam and / or chat with you in some way, at a certain amount per minute. Like an erotic phone, but with a camera.
In the case of sites, that is, the economic model is that of virtual prostitution of prostitutes without a famous brand. They are, that is, what were once called peep shows in the US, which now take place on a planetary scale.
All this is not new: it is well known that the name "pornography" indicates the narrative of the life of prostitutes, therefore knowing that it is the "marketing" or "advertising" part of prostitution should not alienate anyone.
Having said that, the point of online porn is clear: it is a world linked to organized prostitution on a global scale, and hardly any politician has the strength to challenge the prostitute he uses. Not even Berlusconi has managed to really control his own escorts.
It is therefore a frontal battle, from which each actor will parade just five minutes before the battle starts. To understand this, just look at the criticisms.
- It doesn't educate kids about personal relationships. Nice sentence, but at this point the door opens to many questions. The first is "why should porn do it"? The purpose of porn is to narrate the life of prostitutes as such, and it does it very well: only those who forget that they are prostitutes believe the opposite. But apology is not the point: the point is that someone at that point will ask themselves "but if not porn, then WHO?" must educate on sexual relations? The family? No: will you be submerged by a chorus of "and now how do I explain it to my son"? Historically, the Italian family has been terrified only by the idea of educating children, let alone if the proposal will give strength to your party. So school? The mere hypothesis of making sex education in schools, or of proposing it, gives urticaria to any Italian politician. So who should do it? This question will remain unanswered because the answers do not have to exist, this argument is politically weak.
- It does not educate to consensus. This is irrelevant and ridiculous. They are prostitutes, that is, people who have a commercial contract. Nobody asks for consent in a commercial contract. It's not that if I buy a ticket and get on the train I have to call the conductor and ask if Deutsche Bahn feels raped if I sit in seat 75 of carriage 25 of the ICE. "Excuse me, do you feel vulnerable and abused if I put my luggage on the shelf?" this is not the question I would ask a German inspector and I would not foresee a #metoo of the German road hauliers in the coming months. Moral: no one expects consent because it is taken for granted. But I repeat, the apology is not the problem: in substance the consent the actresses give it all right, and it is the reason why the most used word in porn is “yes! oh yes! ". (it's a trick with which you avoid legal consequences in the USA, however). Consent (which would not be necessary in the case of films) exists, and throughout the film, and is shouted a hundred times per actress. A similar argument has no hold on the masses, also because at the first interview with Nappi that replies that she dreams that her rectum will become a public good, and you are fucked.
- Give a wrong image of the woman always available. This feminist mantra is ridiculous if not pathetic, but reflects a real phenomenon that online porn has triggered, that is, female invisibility. Before online porn, when porn per se was rare, a slightly uncovered woman who had entered, say, an airport lounge would have all eyes on her. On average, it did not happen to a man, in the sense that we are used to being invisible: even when women notice you, they hardly show it, so the sensation is that of being invisible. Now that porn exists and the image of a completely naked woman is common, the female body is slowly sliding into invisibility. A neckline, if all goes well, note the fifties. A split is news only among retirees. This sliding into invisibility, to which men are accustomed, is making hysterical women invisible par excellence, that is, feminists. The problem of online porn is not to give the wrong image of the woman as a gender, the problem is to remove the image from the woman as a seductress. A loss of power that feminists, dependent on power, cannot tolerate. But feminists in politics are marginal, so such a crusade would bring few votes.
I therefore believe that this wave of porn repression does not have many chances of being successful.
At best they'll do some scene, but nothing more. And French law will have no effect other than yet another disclaimer where French users are informed that the site is not subject to French jurisdiction.
