How not to burn out sexually: Nina Hartley

2009 September 11
by andreaskluth
Nina Hartley

Nina Hartley

For my piece in the current issue of The Economist, I had the pleasure of talking to, among other people, the equivalent of Meryl Streep in the porn industry: Nina Hartley. She is 50 and says she loves sex more than ever, on camera or off. She has been at it (the camera part) since 1984.

A somewhat unfortunate part of my job, as I am increasingly discovering, is that the most interesting parts of my research and my conversations often fall well outside the realm of what can make it into my articles. Yes, of course, readers might care about how the porn industry is doing. But they’re human so they must also be curious about, well, sex. After all, it’s not everyday that you get to talk to somebody who does it for a living.

In my case, I was just a tad shy for the first few moments. It helped that I have never “consumed” Nina’s “content” so I had no visuals to distract me. Still: How would I talk to somebody who views having sex as I view writing?

It turned out that Nina was very easy and very interesting to talk to. The conversation ranged just as it would have ranged with anybody else. Our health care debate drives her “mad.” California can’t govern itself. That sort of thing.

Performing sex on camera, she said, is

a highly paid form of blue-collar work… sort of like farm labor.

Everybody is an independent contractor and there are no benefits. No benefits. It’s important in such a conversation not to reach for the double entendres.

About the porn industry, Nina was somewhat nostalgic and sentimental. In the 80s, when she started, it was apparently a glamorous sort of thing. The product was hard to get and had rarity value, the production took place in a subculture that considered itself revolutionary. There was a frisson, a pioneer spirit, a certain excitement.

Now it’s seedy, cheap, everywhere. She wouldn’t start again today if she were young now.

So why is she still in it?

In large part because she actually likes the sex, she told me. She thinks that women increase their sensitivity in middle age. At least that is happening to her.

My enjoyment of sex has increased, but for most [performers] it goes down, especially the men.

I asked her if she meant that doing it on camera makes people “numb.” Sometimes, she says. Many performers stop having sex in their private lives altogether. The men basically have to, since they couldn’t have private sex, then perform as well the next day on camera, and any hint of “having trouble” might kill their career. But they also genuinely lose interest.

Nina sees her role now as “mentor” as well as actress, so she counsels the young performers not to let that happen.

Frankly, it amazes me that it–burning out–hasn’t happened to her. She must be a modern Aphrodite.

Bookmark and Share

9 Responses leave one →
  1. 2009 September 11

    I am not touching this post with a ten-foot pole.

  2. 2009 September 11
    Joe permalink

    Don’t know why, but I didn’t see this one coming on 9/11.

  3. 2009 September 12

    Unrelated to topic above, but so funny I had to send it your (and your readers’) way(s).

    We fully expect this stunt out of you, should your book sales falter, a bit ( maybe related to post above).

    http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2009/09/man_completes_public_reading_o.php

    Cheers! ;)

  4. 2009 September 15

    Why can’t the Economist write about Sex? Especially since “feel good factors” have now officially become part of GDP growth (at least in France). If one includes “happiness/joy”into GDP tables, France (according to Sarkozy) will be able to match US’s GDP. Check this: http://bit.ly/4BTxK9

  5. 2009 September 15

    hehehe…

    Sex as a “feel good factor”; call for a board meeting at the Economist. The truth is beginning to hurt.

  6. 2009 September 15

    Actually, I’ve heard quite a lot about this idea lately, Reem. Which is to say: A Gross Happiness Product or something of that sort to replace the patently ridiculous GDP measure. Bhutan is apparently quite advanced in that regard.

    Exuvia, you may be amused to know that we have indeed had these board meetings at The Economist, when discussing previous sex-related coverage. Sort of like Marx and Engels discussing stocks and bonds….

  7. 2009 September 23

    I do love it when numbers guys speak of sexual things. Places order and disorder together in one pleasant stroke.

Leave a Reply

Note: You can use basic XHTML in your comments. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS