What’s wrong with webcamming?

Now that the famed Only Fans has announced a porn ban the site is in the news more than ever. This has brought out a number of pro and anti sex work voices to hash it out in the battle of ideas. I welcome this. Though I note ration thought is not the only thing needed to end the constant attacks on prostitution. Especially when it is connected to large financial institutions or self-inflicted from within the adult entertainment industry. Take Only Fans as the case in point. Just over a year ago the site announced it was adding thousands of new users a day. Now it is seemingly going to destroy that user base in the same way Tumblr did. Yet in the current environment there is no chance that people will stop taking off their clothes and having sex on screen. There is even less chance that people will stop watching it.

What is wrong with online adult entertainment? Look at what famed golden-era porn star Colleen Brennan had to say about adult webcamming:

I see the growing popularity of live web cams as a positive development. It’s sexy, it’s safe for everybody involved, and it empowers women to choose their own path and set their own limits.

She’s right. A site like Fire Cams provides a platform for performers to connect with an audience. People who want to show off their bodies in exchange for money go there. Others who want to pay to look at other people’s bodies go there too. What is so wrong with this? How is it any different than a traditional newspaper with its ad section? Mechanics who want to work on vehicles in exchange for money advertise there. Others who want to pay to have their vehicles fixed read the ads. No one complains. Is it because adults can’t handle the site of nudity? Hundreds of thousands of years of successful human reproduction would suggest otherwise despite ongoing rumors about people fucking through holes in sheets.

Unless we accept the idea that nudity, sex and performing actions for payment are all somehow inherently wrong how can we find flaw in adult entertainment? If some people are paid to fight over a ball professionally in front of millions of people why can’t others be paid to get fucked in front of a live audience? Locating the logic in this anti-sex nonsense is more difficult than finding an orifice through the aforementioned hole-in-the-sheet.

In a recent post I did on a ladyboy go go bar regular commenter Jack mentioned a Bangkok sex worker he knows who sometimes works with ladyboys. He relayed from her that many of the transsexual sex workers who do in-person performances take stimulants to last throughout the night. Is that somehow superior to performing on webcam? Or is working in a retail or agricultural setting or for a pittance better? If so, why? Is it because there is something inherently wrong with nudity or sex? I certainly don’t believe so. Since you are here reading this I would imagine that you agree with me.

Of course you don’t have to agree. Freedom of speech where it actually exists is meant to protect “offensive” speech even more than what is standard and expected. After all saying something that most or all people agree with needs no protection. No one would be attacked or repressed for saying that rain falls from the sky. It is only when the content of speech rubs people the wrong way that it requires any special status. Just as it should be alright for a common citizen to criticize a person in power it should be okay for one consenting adult to show their genitals to other consenting adults. For free or for a fee.