[VerifiedJoseph]

Two questions:

Even after "reviewing millions of videos on the biggest international porn sites" how can they get the 90% figure?

Only looking at the biggest sites is going to get you a biased sample. Not all porn is on big sites. That's not to say there isn't a problem.

And did they talk to sex workers/performers?

Governments and anti-sex orgs have a habit of talking about and legislating sex work without actually listening to those who do it. In March, the UK’s All-Party Parliamentary Group on Commercial Sexual Exploitation published a report[1] labeling all porn exploitation without speaking to any sex workers.

[1] https://www.vice.com/en/article/y3pa9y/porn-sex-workers-expl...

[cf141q5325]

>Only looking at the biggest sites is going to get you a biased sample.

More precisely you get one company. After countless iterations of mergers and buyouts its almost exclusively "ethical capital partners". Producer and sites.

Regarding your point of ignoring sex workers, this tends to become quite despicable quickly. There are some crusaders out there that are doing their best to criminalize sexwork entirely as an end in itself. At the cost of the sex workers. It was quite visible with years of sabotage of the liberal German prostitution laws. They turned working from your own home into a bureaucratic impossibility to then argue with economically exploitative situations of bigger brothels against prostitution entirely. Which gets you back to women working from hotels illegally, which gets you back to human trafficking.

https://www.donacarmen.de/ has been reporting about this for 25 years now. How these women are treated out of political calculus is plain disgusting. Which likely explains why none of these people talk to them and just about them. Once you weaponize safeguards meant to protect sexworkers against them there isnt much ambiguity about your intentions left.

[philipswood]

Looking for statistics from other sources:

This is a pretty dry article: https://academic.oup.com/bjc/article/61/5/1243/6208896

Which describes it's methodology quite clearly.

Their conclusion is that: "In total, we found 12 per cent (n = 15,839) of the total analysable sample (n = 131,738) of titles described sexual activity that constitutes sexual violence."

Their data set comprises of content shown to first time site visitors.

12% is still disturbingly high.

[sambazi]

> of titles described sexual activity that constitutes sexual violence.

guess what, porn titles are clickbait

class dismissed

[AlecSchueler]

> Even after "reviewing millions of videos on the biggest international porn sites" how can they get the 90% figure?

This is covered on page 20 of the study (the beginning of section 1). It's 90% of the 50 most viewed videos.