Should mental health be tracked by cam sites?

[Lelo1]

she was sent to jail for egging on her boyfriend to kill himself with completely understand the seriousness of his mental state.

could Britney Spear's cam and if something happened to affect her mental state while camming who's to blame?

Have ether of those things happened in camming?

If models have control of their cam environment why are members constantly blamed

As far as the incident, it's probable a question of where is the line.
If you pay some one to kill some one else, your responsible for the death.
If you order a pizza, and the person delivering the pizza dies, that's just an accident.

 

[JoleneBrody]

Is there anything in the article that suggests this incident could have been avoided by a psych exam?

We don't know how risky the activity was.
Nor do we know if the model & client under stood the risks.

Could it have been prevent with supervision? Or maybe some safety training? Or maybe a spotter?
We really don't know.

The online adult industry has been a massive blessing for many who suffer from disabilities and chronic illnesses of all sorts including mental. For many this is our only chance at a decent paying career... so fuck that noise.

 

[Lelo1]

The online adult industry has been a massive blessing for many who suffer from disabilities and chronic illnesses of all sorts including mental. For many this is our only chance at a decent paying career... so fuck that noise.

My point was, I don't think the incident could have been avoided by a mental heath screening.

 

[JoleneBrody]

My point was, I don't think the incident could have been avoided by a mental heath screening.

Shit I’m sorry! I didn’t mean to quote you, my bad!

 

[SNATCH]

Do you think that every single person who visits an adult site should have a mental evaluation before they can access it?

That’s how ridiculous this sounds. Equally ridiculous.

O

This probably a very difficult topic but it's long overdue to be discussed. Thinking about the article that was discussed in this post, while it doesn't say the model had mental health issues, the inability to say no to the point were it goes again self-preservation doesn't sound normal at all. If members can face legal issues because they are unknowingly dealing with models that might mental condition where that make them unable to be legal responsible for themselves, should sites need to record this? Sites operate off fantasy and wish fulfillment when a model has some condition were fantasy and reality can be too grey should something be done?

For models this would add a new hurdle and also hurt the work of models that do have diagnosed conditions that they properly manage but if members can take legal blame for a model not using reason on their limits sites need a way to cover the liability. Can we no longer trust the word of the model when it comes to if they have the mental authority to consent or not consent and leave it to a 3rd party to evaluate?

TL;DR Should sites require a psych exam or other proof a model doesn't have a mental issue that would normal not allow her to make legal decisions for herself? Should psych exams be a normal requirement after certain periods of camming due to the mental stress that are place on models over long periods of time? Should a failing psych exam prevent models from further working on sites?

 

[SMuser69]

Have ether of those things happened in camming?

I don't believe there's a way to know that. We know at least on twitter now telling someone to kill themselves makes you libel if the person carries it out. We just had a wellness scare when that model was called out for play pre-recorded content. So I wouldn't say there aren't very fragile people in the industry either members or models.

The other depends on your view of the Brittany situation, if someone in her position she make the legal choice to be a model or if her consent as a model has the same authority as an legally independent person. I'm sure there are at least some models that probably fall within a court appointed guardianship. It's good there's been no situation to really test this one.

 

[THE MOLLIE MARIE]

We know at least on twitter now telling someone to kill themselves makes you libel if the person carries it out.

So don't tell people to kill themselves. Seems easy enough... This conversation is so goofy.

 

[AudriTwo]

This conversation is so goofy.

I'm confused about why we are having this conversation because I'm not convinced it's in concern for mental health with these liability arguments.

 

[AmberCutie]

So don't tell people to kill themselves.

 

[AmberCutie]

This conversation is so goofy.

For sure. The whole thing reads: “how can I cover myself if I do something shitty to a cam model? I don’t want the repercussions of my actions, words, or requests to actually be my fault.”

 

[Dan Epstein]

It's much harder to do the work Pineapple Support does, than to write a biased article that is based on wikipedia factoids at best. Just my two cents about it.

 

[THE MOLLIE MARIE]

Like there's no context where that is appropriate, it's not specific to the industry or performers in general.

 

[Mara_Jayne]

What Amber said!


And I sure as hell don't see him worried about those members who push the boundaries even after a model has banned the member and his multiple accounts. The ones who take it as far as in real life threat. Even for the models who can pass this so called psych test.. what are they supposed to do with the members who are beyond our control? Hell, half the time even getting help legally for a situation like that is beyond difficult half of the time.

But of course that I'm sure would be the models fault. Don't be a model if you can't handle members from sweet and pleasant to the ones already doing f'd up things in a cam2cam when a model turns the cam on to the guy who can't take no for an answer.

Even the most stable of minded can be affected by coercion and manipulation over a period of time when there is trust and a little bit of niativity involved. Bottom line, check your kinks to make sure it's not illegal or possibly dangerous because all these sites have rules in place that say that we are not allowed to perform these illegal acts in the first place. sometimes it's just not okay to inflict your kinks on other people especially if it's dangerous to that person because all that shows that person is that you do not care for their health or safety so long as you get your rocks off.

Entertainment and fantasy. Models are supposed to be acting the kinks out. Acting. When a member pushes for it to be realer because she's not doing it right where it doesn't look good enough. we're not even allowed to have normal orgasms without someone telling us that it is not real. so yeah a guy wanting a girl to strangle herself. He knows it's effed-up and he's going to start small. And then slowly push it so she's doing it more his way and more and more. I've experienced this kind of thing myself without it being that dangerous of a request. It was just more pushing my boundaries on cam. I didn't like it and I eventually let the person know that I knew what he was doing and I wasn't okay with it. And all that he still insisted that he knew he was doing and that I should trust him because he just wants the best for me and just wants to have fun. But I wasn't in a desperate situation and I also didn't get to know this member well enough to trust him in any way beforehand.

We are all adults and all should take our own responsibility to protect ourselves as well as others around us and who interact with. If you cannot see the fault in that member's actions then maybe you yourself should speak to a professional about that instead of trying to implement a safety net for somebody like you who may request something that could result in legal action against you. You seem awfully worried about something that is very unlikely to happen frequently unless your kink does involve something as serious as strangulation.

 

[Emberblaze]

I can't believe that the words "kink shaming" were used after Paige talked about pedophiles and beastiality.

Are you for real?

 

[SaffronBurke]

So don't tell people to kill themselves. Seems easy enough... This conversation is so goofy.

Right, like it's not hard to avoid telling people to kill themselves. You just.... Never fucking do it, because who actually thinks that's OK?

 

[IsabellaSnow]

Everyone else has pretty much covered the topic so I'm just going to throw in an answer to the topic title. Should models have their mental health tracked before camming?

Well, if you want to remove almost all sex workers from the face of the world. Then yeah, I guess we could stop people with mental health issues engaging in sex work. Mental health issues are common in all lines of work, but I'd wager that the sex industry is where they're particularly prevalent. I'm not entirely sure what this mental health examination would be monitoring, because it could be depression, history of trauma, eating disorders, addiction, OCD, schizophrenia, autism.... I mean, the list is pretty long and completely range in whether they'd affect your decision making. Actually, people with issues in decision making might pass all mental health tests with flying colours. And say something like depression could be quite severe, but the person might not be a suicide risk. While someone with mild depression or even no depression as all could be. Where is this line being drawn?

So yeah, basically if we start screening for mental health issues, we'll probably lose a large portion of our favourite sex workers. As has been mentioned, sex work, camming in particular can be a great alternative to those with mental and physical illnesses who struggle in regular jobs. There is also that abuse victims are often more drawn to sex work, largely because it's got a safety and familiarity to it as well as being risky, something which comes hand in hand with mental health issues. I don't like saying it because people who are anti-sex work often use it to harm the trade without really understanding the workers choices. But, it does seem to be linked so I guess it's just important for sex consumers to act responsibly and be considerate (shock horror).

In terms of whether you can prosecute the member. Well it's pretty common sense. If one person, whether model or member, was knowingly pressuring the other person to engage in risky actions for their own gratification, then yes, they should be liable to some extent. Sadly with choking, you can kill someone quite easily and the person being choked wouldn't necessarily realise as they'd pass out. So I can see how this could happen. Sounds like the guy was aware to at least some extent what was going on and was pushing her to cross those lines. My guess is that she trusted him and felt gradually pressured into doing more. Maybe she enjoyed the thrill of it or just wanted to please a good customer. He maybe seemed more experienced and persuaded her she wasn't in danger. It does happen. Predators know how to get under people's skin and there are unfortunately plenty of people into BDSM who will use their dominance to persuade their sub that they're safe and to push boundaries when engaging in risky actions.

 

[Mfcalana]

This probably a very difficult topic but it's long overdue to be discussed. Thinking about the article that was discussed in this post, while it doesn't say the model had mental health issues, the inability to say no to the point were it goes again self-preservation doesn't sound normal at all. If members can face legal issues because they are unknowingly dealing with models that might mental condition where that make them unable to be legal responsible for themselves, should sites need to record this? Sites operate off fantasy and wish fulfillment when a model has some condition were fantasy and reality can be too grey should something be done?

For models this would add a new hurdle and also hurt the work of models that do have diagnosed conditions that they properly manage but if members can take legal blame for a model not using reason on their limits sites need a way to cover the liability. Can we no longer trust the word of the model when it comes to if they have the mental authority to consent or not consent and leave it to a 3rd party to evaluate?

TL;DR Should sites require a psych exam or other proof a model doesn't have a mental issue that would normal not allow her to make legal decisions for herself? Should psych exams be a normal requirement after certain periods of camming due to the mental stress that are place on models over long periods of time? Should a failing psych exam prevent models from further working on sites?

Im kind of shocked about the issues you are raising in your post. Honestly, people can hurt themselves and have mental disorder in any industry. Site requiring a psych exam? Are you serious? This is a really isolated event. People in many other industries where they could actually put people at risk on a daily basis do not require those evaluations so I don't think we should require such process!!

What should be focussed on, instead of shaming the sex industry and blaming the workers like the medias do, calling it degrading (like excuse me, person who wrote the article but who the fuck are you to define whats degrading for someone?) ok getting off track here.... So what should be focussed on is 1: STOP shaming sex work! Make it a safe space where people can openly learn how to manage their business! 2: Give some kind of starter pack to cam girls to learn about how to deal with requests, how to define their boundaries, how to say no, how its their rights to say no if they don't want to do something!! How to discuss about consent before taking money and establish boundaries of both parties. 3: NEVER play dangerous fetishes alone! They were doing asphyxiation. You should never play around with that fetish with no one to supervise! 4: Provide a direct emergency mail or phone for when stuff like that happen!

For all we know the guy could have thought it was still part of the play if they didn't communicate proper rules. We dont know enough, we only know what the medias want us to know. Sorry but I won't go do psychiatric evaluation cause old mate John has some sick fetish and doesn't want to end up in jail if I hurt myself. It's your responsibility as a member as well to communicate! If a model is clumsy and doesn't ask you the right questions, I don't care that your blood is already all in your dick and your brain isn't functioning anymore, its your responsibility to ask the right questions too. It's a 2 way street. STOP blaming women and blame the CULTURE, blame EDUCATION, blame IGNORANCE.

 

[Mfcalana]

I will add that the article linked in this post wasn't too bad. I read another one saying that the adult industry was perpetrating violence against women. No. Violence against women perpetrates violence against women. Funny how we keep getting accused for everything happening to us. As if if we made the sex industry disappear women would not be victims of violence anymore! But then we would still be wearing shorts and they would say that if we covered ourselves we wouldn't tempt men! Then we would end up fully covered and they would say men are going crazy and rape women because they cant get satisfaction on porn sites anymore. Like really, this is a fight we will never win. Should never have opened this thread before going to bed Cant sleep when im that upset!

 

[EdenUk]

This is ridiculous. Beyond stupid.

Given that I’ve been in the industry for more years than I wish to remember, I agree it’s the members who need assessing. Granted, many sex workers suffer mental health issues but why are here?
To earn money, build a decent career with time freedom and improve their life thus improving their mental health.

Why are members on these sites?
- Rare few to jerk off and get their rocks off with no harm or bother.
- Delusional men pushing sex workers into being more than a service provider and taking the complete liberty to control us in every way possible.
- Controlling rich men who use their money to manipulate women into getting what they want.
- Losers who get kicks out of trolling & insulting sex workers whilst they work.
- Rapey men who refuse to take our NO for an answer.
- Pedo guys who want us to engage in their gross sexual fantasies

And you reckon it’s the sex workers who need psych test. Perhaps if certain types of men had the ability to control their sexual desires in a healthy way then perhaps there would not be situations like this and perhaps far less rape and sexual abuse in the world.

But hey, dicks come first right?

 

[DJ_Pioneer]

My answer to the question in this topic is no. First off there are free speech implications because several mental health illnesses can be classified as disabilities so would it even be legal for a website to deny someone access in their terms of service? That type of discrimination might even make it a human rights violation. Secondly I am unsure that it would be legal for websites to track the health data required from EU citizens working as independent contractors because of the GDPR.

I also think we should stop perpetrating the stereotype that men becomes brainless zombies when we are aroused, it is untrue and it only serves to give some people an excuse for their bad behavior. We need to be held accountable and take more responsibility for our actions at a much earlier stage, if bad behaviour is allowed to go unchecked it only gets worse with time.

 

[ThePrincessLuxy]

Ya know wat. Nvm.

 

[MrSwoob]

This thread has a lot of aspect to it. I am a licensed psychotherapist. So I have some thoughts.

To the first question, should psych evals be given to Models? Interesting idea but really not a valid solution. Exams would only evaluate what the model is presenting at the time of the exam. It could identify those with pathology that could have a higher risk of challenges from SW but that would be dependent on several factors that would be hard to evaluate with a pysch assessment A valid exam would also be cost prohibitive. A full assessment in its cheapest form cost $500 and those would require 3 face to face sessions. More extensive assessments would run in the $1,000's. Psych assessments are not a simple blood test or $50 background check.

The sites already cover liability with the TOS as mentioned by others in this thread..

The best prevention is the models to seek counseling, just because. I believe in therapy, even without a major issue but just checking in and having someone that is legally bound to confidentiality can be helpful to a SW. Without insurance that can be a challenge. If you have Insurance then get to a counselor that takes your insurance. ACA has changed the market and more and more Therapist/Counselors are getting into networks. Medicare is now funding counseling at a decent rate. So ask around. One solution to help with the cost without insurance is to look for community resources that offer low cost of free counseling. Many group practices offer hardship rates for $35-40/session. This may be with a fully licensed therapist or intern. Many Universities that offer Master Degrees in counseling will have a community counseling clinic that is run by Interns, don't be put off by that, the interns are supervised by a team and you can get great care in that system. So there are options, you just have to hunt for it a little.