Sex exceptionalism and erasure in porn health protocols

Abstract

Porn production, like all forms of labour, entails certain occupational health and safety (OHS) risks. Porn production has generally not been subject to state occupational health oversight, and porn workers have instead implemented self-regulatory OHS systems. However, in California, where the industry is most established, governmental and non-governmental bodies have made several paternalist attempts to legislate standardised OHS protocols. Their proposed legislation exceptionalises sex work as uniquely dangerous while failing to tailor guidance to the specific needs of and practices associated with porn work. This is largely because: 1) regulators are ignorant of porn’s self-regulatory processes; 2) industry self-regulation conceptualises the occupational hazard on porn sets as infectious bodily fluids, whereas external regulators perceive the hazard as sex itself; and 3) regulators devalue porn work and so do not take the viability of the labour into account when evaluating protocol effectiveness. Using critical-interpretive medical anthropology involving fieldwork and interviews with porn workers and a critical analysis of porn OHS texts, I argue that porn health protocols should be left to industry self-determination, to be developed by porn workers rather than for them.