Yes, S-e-x Sells, But Dating is a Risky Venture for Women

The degree to which porn has driven technological development shows undeniably how driven by sexual desires humans tend to be.

As Jim Harford wrote in a piece entitled, “Does Pornography Still Drive the Internet?,” pornography “spurred innovation in other areas, too. Online pornography providers were pioneers in web technologies, such as video file compression and user-friendly payment systems, and in business models, such as affiliate marketing programmes [sic]… All these ideas went on to find much wider uses. And as the internet expanded, it gradually became less for pornography and more for all that other stuff.” Further, he concluded that sex is likely to continue to drive the development of technology.

In this piece, Harford also pointedly argued that while surely sex can be and is monetized, the bigger/more profitable investment is in the underlying technological developments that it drives. One reason for this of course is how stigmatized and harmed the sex industry and sex workers are by banking services, often getting bank accounts shut down, with workers’ accounts closed and their funds closed off to them. The latest series of controversies with OnlyFans further shows how the actual creators are harmed, while the stakeholders in the company have taken immense profits, using methods with questionable legality. (See, for example, “The Shady History of OnlyFans’ Billionaire Owner.”)

The banking industry and payment processors handle the sex industry with kid gloves and extra charges, if not avoiding payments from any adult industry altogether, due to chargebacks — when customers dispute a transaction, whether because of having buyer’s remorse after getting their rocks off or out of embarrassment for the charges incurred and not wanting partners or family to see the charges, which arguably customers should not be able to do when no fraud was actually committed. As adult entertainment is generally considered a high risk business, sex workers, even legal ones, are harmed. And while we can debate about the toxicity of porn, the fact remains that where there’s demand, there will be supply. The onus is on the viewer to take personal responsibility.

In a patriarchal system where women’s labor is systematically devalued, women are shamed for capitalizing on their femininity or sexuality. Not only shamed, but criminalized, as much sex work remains illegal, even what might transpire between two consenting adults. How dare women ask for something in return for our sexualization by the male gaze? Or how dare we ask for more than just physical intimacy from a man?

I understand the idea of not wanting relationships to be transactional. But all relationships require negotiation. Why are men who so long for a woman’s affection reticent to court her? The dating app era, I believe, has heightened men’s sense of entitlement.

All I demand as a woman is respect. I am not selling access to my body, but that doesn’t mean that I will give it up for a man who makes minimal to no effort besides physical advances. The responses from my recent article, Why Is It So Hard For Men to Do the Bare Minimum? are telling. When I bring up the idea of “The Five Love Languages” and assert that men need to offer the women they pursue literally any of the other love languages in addition to physical touch, men show offense, arguing that this amounts to “prostitution,” that they as men have been used for cash, or that only attractive men can get away with hooking up with women without giving anything in return. The latter claim is not the brag they think it is.

Why is it so hard for men to understand that if they don’t want to see a relationship as transactional, they still have to provide value? That if they want to see a relationship as meaningful, then they too need to provide value in addition to the physical intimacy? That if they devalue physical intimacy, that shallowness will continue to seep into how shallowly they experience life? Or ultimately, if they just want sex, to pay for it, or to otherwise tribute and court a woman? Men, if you want a woman to submit to you, it benefits you to earn her submission.

And why is it so wrong for women to capitalize on what men want? As I saw on a woman’s shirt the other day, “Decriminalize women.” I don’t believe humans are naturally monogamous, and this is why I hope to help usher us into a more conscious, collective, co-operative matriarchal age. Sure, humans can engage in sex just for pleasure, but it undeniably creates an energetic connection between two people, and to dismiss it is a shallow experience is to negate the divinity within each of us. Let us respect each other and ourselves more.

Like my writing? Become a Medium member today for only $5/month. Your membership fee directly supports Olivia Love and other writers you read. You’ll also get full access to every story on Medium.

You can also support me and buy me a coffee.

References:

Brewster, T. and Dawkins, D. (June 16, 2021). “The Shady History of OnlyFans’ Billionaire Owner.” Forbes Magazine. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2021/06/16/the-shady-secret-history-of-onlyfans-billionaire-owner/?sh=4842078a5c17

Harford, T. (5 June 2019). “Does Pornography Still Drive the Internet?” BBC News. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/business-48283409

Ryan, C. and Jetha, C. (2012). Sex at Dawn: How We Mate, Why We Stray, and What It Means for Modern Relationships. Harper Perennial: New York.

Stedman, Scott. (March 9, 2022). “AdminLeo: OnlyFans’ Owner’s Dubious Financial History.” Retrieved from https://forensicnews.net/adminleo-onlyfans-owners-dubious-financial-history/

York, J. (August 28, 2021). “The Real OnlyFans Scandal is the Unaccountable Power of Platforms and Banks.” Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/28/onlyfans-scandal-platforms-banks-ban-sexual-content-sex-workers