Saturday, 7 November 2015

Digital lust

Like many industries, adult entertainment has been compelled to adapt in a digital age. Only recently, Playboy, the iconic magazine and adult brand, announced that its magazine would follow suit after its website and would no longer include nudity from March 2016. Clearly the company has realised that while sex might sell, it no longer does so via the medium of print. The shift from print to television and film and latterly the internet respectively, has seen revenue streams for adult entertainers move accordingly. And in doing so, it’s changed the relationship fans of their work have with them too.

The allure of adult entertainers is arguably contributed to by the fact that they appear unreachable; individuals who operate within a fantasy and highly sexualised world. Traditionally, their fans could fantasise over them in the knowledge that their relationship is one the adult entertainer is ignorant to and therefore never subject to reciprocation of emotions or affection, lustful or otherwise. Though now, the internet has changed that.

As with any entertainers, social media has given unprecedented access to adult entertainers that alters the aforementioned relationship. Now, lustful desires or merely convivial banter or compliments can be expressed via a tweet to adult performers and perhaps even responded to. Where adult performers were once unreachable, the status quo has now been redefined.

Similarly, the digital age has changed the adult industry with premium rate chat line channels. And with it, it’s enabled men (and woman) to have even more access to adult entertainers than ever before.

For those not familiar with the format of these channels, scantily clad or semi-nude women (depending on the time of day) appear on-screen while gyrating with sexually suggestive motions while talking to callers. It’s essentially a chat line where callers can see the person they’re talking to and what they’re doing rather than relying on their imagination. Not wanting the constraints of the television regulations that restrict them to largely softcore acts, some performers on said channels have also opted to operate webcam shows online (and with it presumably charging their viewers even more than the premium rate numbers).

This isn’t anything new; for decades premium rate numbers offering the same service have been
found in the classifieds section of tabloid newspapers. Yet technology furthers the extent of what can be offered and what the consumers are afforded in their pleasure and gratification. Furthermore, it’s altered their relationship with the women they receive remote gratification from. And that’s given rise to the perception amongst some men that their relationship is more than simply transactional.

With the increased and unprecedented access to adult entertainers, many of the men calling these premium rate numbers or ‘chatting’ via webcam are under the impression that this represents a relationship of sorts. While their attraction is based on lustful desire that isn’t reciprocated beyond the façade they’re paying for, some men seemingly fail to understand this. Consequently, they’re happy to buy gifts for the women, shower them with sycophantic messages on social media and overall fail to realise the reality of their interaction as paid titillation.

I struggle to empathise with the rationale of these men. Firstly, and bizarrely, they’re paying for adult entertainment at a premium rate when the internet is awash with a plethora of adult entertainment that’s absolutely free. Not to mention, the internet typically offers much more risqué material than anything they’re paying for. But they’re also going beyond their transaction in buying gifts for the women; an act typically reserved for actual friendships or relationships of which these certainly aren’t.

So why do the men do it? Loneliness? Delusion? Does it make them feel that they could actually have a genuine relationship with these women? With their access to adult entertainers, perhaps they’ve decided to abandon the pursuit of relationships in the real world (which would suggest yet another erosion of social interaction that the internet has brought about). Whatever it is they think they might achieve, it certainly won’t be a relationship that isn’t commercial.

One caller to a chat line channel racked up a bill of £91,000 on account of the women he spoke to sympathising with him following a breakup with his ex-partner. He’s probably not the only person to find themselves in such a situation either. Although did the premium rate numbers not indicate to him that they weren’t providing a counselling service or seeking his friendship? Men like this are blinded by the fact that their access to these women represents little more than a financial opportunity that exploits their naivety, inability to identify the features of a friendship or relationship, delusion and loneliness.

It’s easy to drift between derision and pity for these men but certainly not empathy. To pay to watch a women gyrate on a screen when there’s free adult entertainment online just doesn’t seem to be a decision based upon logic. Alas, lust can deny people of sound perspective.

Speaking objectively, one can’t knock the hustle of the women. And it isn’t just limited to webcam and chat line performers but also traditional adult entertainment actresses. Their social media presence facilitates the interaction the men crave. Furthermore, their online shopping wish lists enable these men to frequently buy the attention (mistakenly taken for affection) of their favourite performers.

There is arguably an intimacy that is established for the men paying to ‘chat’ but arguably not reciprocated by the performers who are separated by a phone line, television screen or computer. Thus, they limit much of the vulnerability of traditional sex work. And presumably, are getting reasonably well paid for it in the process with gifts and money from their fans to boot. If there were to be a perception of the relationship between the women and their callers being imbalanced, in most cases it would seem it isn’t the women that are losing out.

Nonetheless, the digital age has reduced the extent to which adult performers are able to separate their personal and professional life with the increased access they grant. No longer are their fans faceless readers and viewers of films but individuals who they’ve spoken to and in some cases seen via webcam. As a result, they’re providing more intimacy in the relationship between performer and the public and reducing the personal sphere for performers. Given the stigma around adult entertainment, this shift has likely limited their ability to keep the spheres of their personal and professional lives as separate as they once were.

Like many industries, the digital age has changed the adult industry and with it, it’s changed the perception of relationships and friendship for some men who aren’t able to distinguish between paid entertainment and reality. It’s an enigma when juxtaposed with traditional notions of relationships and how we define friendship. But hopefully not one that sets a precedent for the features of human interaction that the human condition craves. Indeed, perhaps that craving, but the inability to fulfil it for said men, is what led to their unrequited affections for adult entertainers in the first instance.
SHARE:
© iamalaw

This site uses cookies from Google to deliver its services - Click here for information.

Blogger Template Created by pipdig