From what I have read, the biggest impediment to having large sample sizes in studies of porn actresses is that they do not wish to participate in the discussions because of the "damaged goods" attitude that society holds. You are right that sex workers need more spaces to develop their own narratives.

Don't you think there is a difference between "many of the abused children I worked with ended up in sex work," which operates from a population of abuse, and "sex workers have largely been abused," which operates from the sex work population? Of course, if you work with abused people who largely go into sex work,…

Well, we're all dealing with opinions here, except for the commenter in this thread being called a troll, who is actually providing factual data.

I know. I don't think that commenter is sympathetic.

You like better with dinosaur?

Julia Roberts' teeth are terrifying.

That's not what I get from the OP or the subsequent comments.

Ah, ok. So, the Playboy companion tapes where the girls have fun without clothes on, but there's no sex? Got it.

You mean the two tapes that were clearly created for personal use and not to be released into the sex industry? Or do you mean something else?

I loved VIP!

I would totally hate watch this video, but since I have been getting Pitbull and Kesha's "Timber" stuck in my head on the weekly for about 6 months, I can't take the risk. It's like I mocked the taste of the Gods and this is my Sisyphean task.

No. Seriously. I can't. Other people? Maybe. Me? No.

If I agreed with you about everything except what the article is about and you find that not only argumentative, but unnecessarily so, we have different definitions.

So, about those letters...

I didn't miss the point. I am responding only to this comment: "If I ever saw a men's magazine publishing advice for how men could secure a brainless hottie like she was the latest Omega watch, there would be stern-WTF letters being written to editors." You have seen some, now write some letters. That's it. I am…

That's a matter of opinion, but the fact remains that they exist. That was all i wanted to show. Good luck with your letters to the editor.

The article is terrible. Yes. Cosmos sucks.

You are so cross. I don't even know what to tell you to pacify you. My first post was a legitimate question. I really don't understand your investment in equivocating and I thought it might change my reaction if I understood. I should have guessed from your responses to the OP that you just aren't getting it and…

Could that be because you won't concede that you missed the point and seem to b e continuing to miss the point in a meta display?

Are you going out of your way to misunderstand what the OP is writing?