In a 2012 article published in the International Journal of Sexual Health, James D. Griffith, Lea T. Adams, Christian L. Hart, and Sharon Mitchell asked 176 porn actresses to describe the reasons that led them to their profession, as well as their likes and dislikes of their chosen career. The responses were coded and categorized, and the frequencies were tabulated into three tables. The response categories, along with their percentages, are shown below. (The percentages add up to more than 100 because respondents could list multiple motives, likes, and dislikes.)
Reasons for Getting Into Porn
Money: 53 percent
Sex: 27 percent
Attention: 16 percent
Fun: 11 percent
Related Industry: 7 percent
Acquaintance: 7 percent
Chance/Confusion: 6 percent
Creative Expression: 5 percent
Personal Growth: 4 percent
Disliked Prior Job: 4 percent
Coercion: < 1 percent
List of Likes
Money: 41 percent
People: 39 percent
Sex: 21 percent
Freedom/Independence: 18 percent
Attention: 13 percent
Fun: 8 percent
Creative Expression: 7 percent
Personal Fulfillment: 4 percent
Rebellion: 1 percent
List of Dislikes
People: 39 percent
STD Risks: 29 percent
Exploitation: 20 percent
Work Conditions: 10 percent
Social Stigma: 7 percent
Drugs: 7 percent
Politics: 6 percent
Discomfort: 4 percent
Outside Relationships: 2 percent
Notwithstanding the potential bias that might be inherent in such self-reporting, the findings cast doubt on the stereotype of the exploited, abused, and broken woman forced into porn servitude. The results discussed here are in line with those that I reported in an earlier article that seemed to dispel the notion that porn actresses were “damaged goods”—albeit it is instructive to note that the former porn actor Dave Pounder suggested otherwise when I interviewed him last summer.
These cumulative findings pit two opposing camps against one another. Is the proper position the one that seeks to emancipate women from the clutches of the “porn patriarchy”? Alternatively, would such protection not be a form of benevolent sexism (as it assumes that women need protecting)—and as such, women should be free to choose their vocations as they see fit? Ah, the quandary!