The Myth of the Liberated Sex Worker
The recent online zeitgeist has centred heavily upon the debate surrounding modern day ‘sex work’. Everyone knows of these sites, which have become a current pop cultural ‘wink-wink, nudge-nudge’ type of joke: think OnlyFans, NSFW X pages lurking in the dark recesses of the website (albeit Elon Musk’s continued obliteration of such pages, as to the shy disappointment of many across social media), or lewd Patreon subscriptions that tempt in the sex-hungry and money careless. What seems to fail to be considered, however, is where work on these sites relates to the long and traditional history of sex work: the oldest profession in history, as it is known. There seems to be a disconnect, in the current day and age, between the role of the prostitute and the role of the OnlyFans model: one is less lambasted, less common, and perhaps less dangerous. To a degree, liberal feminism is even a proponent of sex work as ‘empowering’, ‘taking female sexuality into her own hands’, etc. In reality, is the OnlyFans model not simply a glorified prostitute? This is subject to debate, of course; however, recent online discourse has sparked question as to how ‘empowering’ or ‘liberating’ this new line of sex work can be, or whether it is simply a rehashing of the patriarchal exploitation seen in avenues such as prostitution or escorting.
With the statement of this work as ‘the oldest profession in history’ ringing true, and the fact that as long as society is a patriarchy, it will be in demand, the rise of online sex work does have its benefits. The ability to record and upload content from (in majority) a safe environment, such as your own home, behind the safety of a screen- or even in anonymity- is evidently leaps and bounds ahead of standing on a street corner or residing in a brothel. But this kind of sex work is not suddenly obsolete. An issue with online sex work is that it remains almost exclusively accessible only for those fairly well off, in an established living situation. Many people across the world still rely on the trade of prostitution and the like as a final resort, or simply because other means of income are too difficult to access: and because of this, they remain vulnerable to exploitation or sexual assault. Despite this, though, the ‘privilege’ of being an online sex worker is incredibly marginal.
Recently, I watched the YouTube documentary about adult star Lily Phillips, created by Josh Pieters, and it provoked my thought process in regards to the current feeling amongst online liberal feminist trends that sex work taken on independently, through sites such as OnlyFans, is a means of reclaiming and owning your sexuality- working for yourself and using men’s lust to benefit you. Turn 18 and make millions from OnlyFans! It’s easy, it’s simple, and it’s lucrative- if you’re good looking enough, why not use it? Why not show it off? Profit off of men, it’s about time the tides turned!
This wave of thinking is skewed, and this realisation hit me whilst watching the documentary. Though the subject of the documentary, Lily Phillips, a woman who has become recently prolific for the claimed plan to sleep with 100 men in one day, began with this same optimism, it ended heartbreakingly. Seeing her at the end of the documentary with smeared makeup, ruined hair and a broken spirit posed a striking contradiction to this propagated ideal of the empowered pornstar. The emotional and physical impact of servicing 100 men in a day- men who have travelled to take advantage of her body for their own gratification, with no concern as to her wellbeing- is not empowerment, and is not liberating. It appears the polar opposite. And although Phillips’ 100-man quota is on the extreme end of the spectrum, the effect of this work on women and how they are viewed remains widespread. With the easy access to personal sexual service by women online, and the only roadblock being a paywall or a password, there is no advance for feminism, and no progression as to the reduction of misogynistic perspectives. Women remain sexual objects- and it makes little difference as to whether the sex is physical or virtual. It does not empower them.