In 2020, online subscription site OnlyFans raked in $2.4 billion dollars in revenue, largely due to the pandemic. The effects of social distancing became an asset to the company, whose reputation exploded as the primary source of revenue for adult content creators. But how much freedom is actually allotted to the workers under these conditions? And how much of what we desire is original? The influence of the bourgeois on our sexual norms and beauty standards is perpetuated through technological progress, and handed to the masses as fact. This is shown by social media and banks’ restrictions on sexually explicit content creators, further perpetuating the marginalization of sex workers of color and the endangerment of consumers as a whole.
As with a plethora of other social norms, the ruling class holds a massive amount of influence on our sexual desires. Earlier this month, Mastercard rolled out a wave of new regulations, hitting online sex workers the hardest, as “[b]oth payments providers and banks reserve the right to cut off relationships with anyone who they view to be in breach of their terms” (Stokes, 2021). Essentially, Mastercard now acts as the gatekeeper in deciding what is (or is not) appropriate to monetize, thus deciding what is desirable and/or acceptable for consumers. This is a prime example of alienation as coined by Marx and Engels — the physical body of the worker is the product, and their value is placed upon them by those in power. The estrangement process goes even further than that of which The Communist Manifesto speaks, given the fact that these sex workers do not create a tangible product; their image is reproduced countless times via the internet, with the sole purpose of entertaining the consumer, meaning that their likeness and their body are sold in tandem. Their body, their personality, their branding, and their reputation are the bundled product. Furthermore, these subscription based sites function by taking a cut from the creator; in OnlyFans’ case, the company takes 20% of the creator’s profits (Cooban, 2021), meaning that even if a creator was able to build a pornography empire, their success remains indebted to (and further promotes) the company. This is just one of the dilemmas of advancement in tech; more problems lay ahead in the effects of the content on society.
Beauty standards and sexual norms are further perpetuated by technological progress, most evident in algorithmic issues as faced by sex workers of color. Racial bias in tech forces sex workers (most often double minorities) to overwork for the same amount of engagement as their white counterparts. As Jaida Violet (a plus-size Black sex worker) told Insider, “[she] can go to another website that is for sex workers, but it doesn’t have the same traction that OnlyFans does”. The concept of “hype” is bolstered by technological advancement, and encourages the worker to participate in their own exploitation; the boom of now media giant OnlyFans is a manifestation of Horkheimer and Adorno’s assertions on the downfalls of technological advancement. With the growth of the online sector of sex work, content creators are now forced to grow and maintain their audience — a practice that is far more difficult for those who have historically been deemed less attractive by the ruling class who defines beauty standards. These obstacles of racial bias and shadowbanning (when a specific person’s content receives less engagement for prejudicial reasons) are themselves acknowledged by the companies; in February of 2021, Instagram chief Adam Mosseri apologized to another plus-sized Black model Nyome Nicholas-Williams for the censorship of her photo, despite having the exact same image remain up on the profile of her white friend (Fleming, 2021). And yet, despite the blatant and egregious nature of censorship, a great deal of these sex workers remain indebted to this technology to make their living. That being said, the content being published online holds more damage yet, this time in regards to the purchaser.
We often discuss how sex work is dangerous for the worker or the performer — but what must be addressed is the potential danger thrust upon the consumer in regards to pornography. As stated by The Culture Industry, film often has the capacity to “[create] the illusion that the world outside is a seamless extension of the one which has been revealed in cinema” (Horkheimer and Adorno, 99). This ties in once again with the advent of the internet, as the prevalence of porn exposure to younger audiences brings about the idea that what is being depicted is fact; it does not require critical thinking, especially when considering that a younger viewer has absolutely no point of objective reference. In a 2017 study conducted by the University of Nebraska consisting of 330 undergraduate men aged 17 to 54, 43% reported that their first exposure to porn was by accident — a statistic that can be directly attributed to the porn industry’s pervasive nature online (Reed, 2017). The observable danger then lies in what consumers do with the information they absorb as fact. The same study found that a result of such early exposure to porn in turn led to a generalized belief that men should dominate women. While it goes without saying that there are a litany of other factors in regards to an individual’s views on sex, data shows that the acceptance of porn as reality heavily warps the mind of the viewer, regardless of age.
As unfortunate as it may sound, our sexual desires and codes of attraction are not our own; they are simply byproducts of the environment we were raised in and the media we consume. The standards of sexuality and beauty are placed upon society by those in power, ultimately creating a false reality for consumers. Their influence permeates our beliefs by way of monetary and technological control — a power only held by the ruling class. This in turn leads to the increased marginalization of sex workers (particularly minorities), and the corruption of the consumer’s sexual expectations. That being said, I do believe that there is hope; the unity among sex workers is incredibly strong, and pushback against large companies like OnlyFans has been successful in creating change. It’s only a matter of maintaining the momentum that they have created, and using the tools of progress to their advantage.
Works Cited
Akhtar, Allana, and Taiyler Simone Mitchell. “For Sex Workers of Color, OnlyFans’ Reversal Doesn’t Go Far Enough. How Censorship and Bias Puts Their Careers at Risk.” Insider, 10 Sept. 2021, https://www.insider.com/sex-workers-of-color-say-onlyfans-ban-threatens-their-livelihoods-2021-9.
Cole, Samantha. “Sex Workers Say Mastercard Ignored Their Concerns About New Regulations.” VICE, 21 Oct. 2021, https://www.vice.com/en/article/bvzwk3/mastercard-new-regulations-for-adult-content.
Cooban, Anna. “OnlyFans Has Boomed during Lockdown. Users Spent $2.4 Billion on the Adult-Entertainment Site in 2020, and 120 Million People Now Use It.” Business Insider, 27 Apr. 2021, https://www.businessinsider.com/onlyfans-lockdown-boom-transactions-hit-24b-revenue-up-553-2021-4.
Fleming, Amy. “The Model Who Made Instagram Apologise: Alexandra Cameron’s Best Photograph.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 10 Feb. 2021, https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2021/feb/10/model-instagram-apologise-nyome-nicholas-williams-alexandra-cameron-best-photograph.
Reed, Leslie. “Boys and Porn: Researchers Find Age of First Exposure Linked to Sexist Attitudes.” University of Nebraska College of Education and Human Sciences, 8 Aug. 2017, https://cehs.unl.edu/edpsych/news/boys-and-porn-researchers-find-age-first-exposure-linked-sexist-attitudes/.Stokes, Rose. “How Banks Are Controlling Your Wanks.” VICE, 21 Sept. 2021, https://www.vice.com/en/article/v7eaw4/banks-influence-on-sex-life.
