The Media vs. Pornography

Almost every pornographer in the US lives a lie. However superficially fearlessness their stance on sex and free speech, the majority hide behind layers of pseudonym, misdirection and vagueness. I’m a prime example. I see nothing wrong with sex for pleasure, or the commerce of lust, but still fear other people’s prejudices to a point where I’m unwilling to use my real name in this blog. Faced with standing up for pornography and working as a double agent in the mainstream, I’ve made the obvious choice. An easy decision to justify in a country where selling a vibrator can land you in prison. The truth is I’m not alone. Most people in the industry would rather function in society than fight it. Given an issue so fundamentally silly, and polluted with vile people and product, few sane people are lining up to be martyrs.

Of course anonymity, like much in porn, is faked. Spend time behind the scenes and you’ll hear porn names transubstantiate at the end of every sentence. When what’s normally private is for sale, common things become markers of trust. In a world where you can be naked in front of anyone, and some refuse to dine with people you don’t consider friends, names mean a lot.

We operate within a set of generally accepted assumptions which allow us to be as honest as we can as often as we can. Identities have to be shared for business purposes and we have to sign documents using our legal names. We assume there’s nothing to gain from making our lives, and those of our partners and children, more difficult and trust as much as we can.

That’s why I’m so upset at the ‘outing’ of Girl With a One Track Mind in last week’s Sunday Times. Abby Lee, the author of the blog and subsequent book which is now doing well in the UK (and was before her exposure), writes explicitly about her sex life safe in the knowledge she could be honest in the way only anonymity allows. To discuss intricate sexual details with family and friends is bizarre. Abby Lee could share what she did because she wouldn’t have to answer for her honest at work or home.

Were the book written an anti-sex crusader, a noted public figure or hint at matters of national security you could argue that the real identity of the author was a story. Abby’s just a woman who didn’t want to make her personal and professional life more difficult than necessary.

The article, by Anna Mikhailova, has no aim but to punish Abby for her unfettered sexuality. Leading with a suggestion her involvement with the Harry Potter franchise might be osmotically corrupting children, it goes on to refer repeatedly to Abby’s desire to remain anonymous. There’s no surprise or twist and at the end of the article we’ve not been given a single reason to believe that Abby’s secrecy is in any way dishonest or unreasonable. Mikhailova’s just engaged in a piece of cheap journalistic vandalism with no news objective, akin to revealing the home phone number of a celebrity simply because they’ve made efforts to keep it secret.

Some members of the fourth estate still seem to think those who celebrate sex should be shamed for doing so, even while using their work to line their own pockets. Anonymous sex-bloggers beware.

The Guardian have now covered the story well. Read it here.

Popularity: 35% [?]