http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...ef=mostpopular
...but I like big boobies!




http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...ef=mostpopular
...but I like big boobies!




Interesting article, T1. I guess anyone who has appeared in any movie/vid in iafd.com database could be considered a pornstar. I've met/come across 9 different house dancers listed in iafd.com database who have appeared in anywhere from 2 to more than 70 movies.
But I have never met the 719 lb.female pornstar. (Or the 74 lb. spinner/midget). The % of caucasian and black pornstars seem to be more or less in line with general population %'s. And 20% of Latina male pornstars have pierced jewelry other than earlobes ?
OK, I'll close out with a joke, but it won't be on the 719 lb. female pornstar. Here goes:
Q- Why do Latina male pornstars make good marriage material ?
A- Because they have a proven track record of buying jewelry and experiencing pain.![]()
I'm right 96% of the time.I don't sweat
the other 5% .......................





A meaningless report by a guy with way too much time on his hands. I care as much about the "average" porn star as I do about the "average" dancer, escort or cam girl. It's all about finding the ones you like and that can change from week to week or even day to day...
It's also worth noting that IAFD has never been known for being all that accurate. Lot's of bad info...





yay, my height, weight, boob size and natural hair color! i always knew i should have been a porn star haha.
The birthplaces of the top 3 states of California, Texas and Florida is pretty much nailed. Just about all the drop-dead gorgeous women of the USA come from those 3 states.
To yoda: actually IMDB is highly accurate for the sheer amount of titles they have, unless you can cite specifics. I can't speak for IAFD, however.




If you think the entire purpose of such a thorough investigation was in aid of "finding the ones you like", is there any point in me even saying this?
The reason this study is incredibly important and valuable, is because it blows apart almost every misconception anti-porn organisations have had about porn stars for so long.





Actually that's not at all what I said. I'm not interested in stats. I'm interested in individuals. His report is strictly stat-based and actually a relatively small sampling of the data base.
He used a flawed data base for his research. Also, while I don't agree with what those anti-porn organizations stand for I don't honestly think that hair color, boob size or any of the other statistics he collated are part of the issue that those groups have with porn. He's not going to change the minds of the haters.





I miss-spoke when I typed IMBD (it's been changed) I know little about IMBD but my assumption would be that, since they deal in the mainstream, the info is accurate. The problem with IAFD is that they deal in a business where accurate record-keeping is intentionally vague. Talent names change regularly, talent is often credited to the wrong films, films are often listed under multiple titles and so on and so on...





I work in Porn
MANY MEN WANTED TO LAY ME DOWN, BUT FEW WANTED TO LIFT ME UP
-Eartha Kitt


The average is my type physically, although the hair and skin color can vary a lot for me. It was pretty interesting though. The stereotypes probably come from the really big stars that crossover into pop culture.










Hey, why not? get somethin' of value off there.
MANY MEN WANTED TO LAY ME DOWN, BUT FEW WANTED TO LIFT ME UP
-Eartha Kitt





I'm 15llbs lighter than the average porn star and my tits are bigger![]()
"Fake tits are like Kevlar. They don't guarantee your chances of survival but they sure as hell improve it."
Tempest





This doesn't surprise me. It sounds like the prototype of a Spiegler Girl, which are essentially the most popular pornstars in the industry in terms of mainstream and non-porn work go. They are typically the ones that get crossover work in many forms (not just talking about acting). Big boobs & blonde hair can't really get crossover work these days. And a bunch of top companies in porn refuse to shoot girls who have had implants of any kind.
I don't know why people are so fixated on outdated 90s stereotypes of what a "porn star" should look like. A lot of strip clubs even, still have those ideas. But that's not whats selling in porn. Implantless girl next door (any breast size) and fetish are the only things really selling in porn these days. Unless of course a girl has been around for awhile and has created a fan base.




His stats go from the individual profiles though... Regardless of anything, if you're not interested in stats, as a general statement, it's entirely no surprise that any of this would be of any interest to you in the first place though, lol.
The stats he gave are representative of the fact that many porn stars today (and ensuring this information is accurate is not that hard) are regular women - girls next door...
Hair colour, boob size, etc are indeed a few bones the anti-porn lobby pick with the industry!
This blows apart the very real argument coming from the asshole of the anti-porn lobby, that porn stars are "fake", altered women who pose a threat to the "common woman" because they give an unnatural standard of attractiveness that isn't "real". - When in reality, we see pretty clearly that the majority of women in porn are actually pretty average and very natural.
And meh, if you have the attitude that he won't change the minds of "the haters", why does anyone bother arguing against them in the first place?
It's not a bad thing if you're actually interested in the subject matter; and people will always naturally strive for change and progression.




thanks for the link, interesting read!
Theres no sense crying over every mistake,
you just keep on trying till you run out of cake
Wild that porn careers longevity went from 12 years to 4 years. I can guess some of the reasons but wow that is a huge drop from the 70s. Even the 90s it was 9yrs to 4yrs today. Incredible decline.
16% of porn features squirting. Shit its popularity in camming continues to baffle me then, I thought squirtingw ould be way more overrepresented in porn than 16%
lol at the average age of a MILF porn performer is 33.
hahaWith all this talk about size, why is Millward's study suspiciously silent when it comes to the ol' baloney pony?
"They don't report it," he said of IAFD. If these numbers were reported, Millward said, he would be "incredibly dubious" about their accuracy.
And that I want to see 1970s era porn, all Ive seen is Deepthroat. Im looking around and found this - http://pinterest.com/cerisepink/1970s-porn-films/ ah the posters are even awesome:
lol I love it.









How would you have any idea what I may or may not be interested in based on what gets posted on a website? Ah yes, the answer is that you wouldn't...
It's not an "attitude" it is my opinion based on the nature of this work. He didn't interview a single member of the industry or present anything other than a compilation of statistics gleaned from a data base that is well known to be inaccurate. The haters you speak of will pick-apart the work in the same way that I did. Clearly you are very passionate about the topic and that is all well and good but I fail to see how my opinion of this particular "coffee table book" approach to the porn industry would or should stop anyone else from trying to do better. If I wasn't interested in the subject matter I wouldn't be taking the time to (a) criticize the work or (b) argue with you about it.




Oh Christ. Okay wise one... <3 Here's the clue: It's because you said you're weren't interested in it.
"Actually that's not at all what I said. I'm not interested in stats. I'm interested in individuals" ~ your words.
Good god. I'll take my business elsewhere now, I think, lol.





I would suggest you work on your comprehension skills. In your quote of my post "it" refers to the stat-based article that the author fabricated simply by reading a web site and not conducting any sort of in-depth research. I never said anywhere that I am not interested in the industry, the people who work in it or the public's perception of those people. Being a hot-head does not help the cause that you care so dearly about.




"I'm not interested in stats. I'm interested in individuals. His report is strictly stat-based and actually a relatively small sampling of the data base" means that even if he garnered his stats from a much more reliable source, this thread would not have been up your alley. It's all still about stats. And, according to you, you're not interested in them.
Upon kindly acknowledging your lack of interest in stats that you informed me of, you said: "How would you have any idea what I may or may not be interested in based on what gets posted on a website?"
Based on what gets posted a website? I went on a response that you typed. Which leads me to ask: Are you a reliable source for your own opinion on things?
Being "interested in the industry, the people who work in it or the public's perception of those people" means that you, at the very least, made it to the correct forum. At this rate, perhaps that is as much as we can hope for.
Last edited by Incantatious; 03-10-2013 at 12:43 PM.
Bookmarks