A few questions we need to answer to have a meaningful discussion about this:
1. How should we operationally define "mainstream" porn? Most available? Most sales? Most downloads from internet? Most acting jobs available?
2. What are different meaningful categories of porn to be assessed? Hardcore vs. softcore? Sex-positive vs. demeaning/degrading to women? High gloss vs. amateur?
3. Using rigorous sampling procedures, exactly what types of porn meet our operational definition of mainstream?
=======================
You make an excellent point. I hadn't even thought of that.
Embarrassing? Yes, because these are very basic questions.
And I'll go further: this is no doubt exactly the sort of detailed info -- gathered from sex workers themselves -- that publications like *Spread* seek to provide.
<http://www.spreadmagazine.org/ >
Seems like I need to pay more attention to them and others like them and less to my own preconceptions.
Hmmm.
Let me try, in almost real time, to refine my view. All I've viewed in recent years is the *amateur* material -- most of which, in my experience, is pretty straightforward and innocuous (if dull). Some is over the top in mean spiritedness and misogyny; that's definitely turned me off and darkly colored my opinion.
Despite that, I must admit I've only seen a small sample of what's available. There are branches I know nothing about, outlets that are totally unknown to me and performers whose work I'd probably dig if I was exposed to it.
A Google search revealed this:
<http://www.lazaruscorporation.co.uk/v4/articles/alternaporn.php >
As of this writing, I know less-than-zero about it but I'll check out the so-called *alternaporn* situation and see if my opinions are modded as a result.
.d.