Camsites as a Context for Sexual Consent Education: User Experiences

ABSTRACT

Understanding sexual consent is essential for the promotion of healthy sexual relationships and the prevention of sexual violence. Emerging sexual technologies can provide opportunities for users to learn about and potentially practice navigating sexual consent with partners, but this field of research is still nascent. In this study, we surveyed 5,828 erotic camsite users to determine whether they learned something new about sexual consent from their use of the site. Participants mostly identified as heterosexual white men, aged 18 to 99. Our results showed that 12% (n = 699) reported learning something new about sexual consent from their camsite use. Those who reported learning something new were prompted to provide a qualitative report of what they had learned; 36% (n = 252) did so. Users reported learning about the importance of respecting boundaries; how consent can change or differ based on the person, context, or time; the implicit and explicit forms of sexual consent, and the need to explicitly communicate about sexual consent; and how consent norms apply to commercial sexual contexts. Our findings show that people are learning about sexual consent from camsites, but the obtained knowledge is complex and sometimes negative. This study sheds light on the potential of emerging sexual technologies as sources for sexual education, and highlights the need for further research exploring the ways in which understandings of digital sexual consent translate to broader contexts.

In the age of digital intimacy, conversations and boundaries around sexual consent are evolving in nuanced ways. Far beyond a simple understanding that “no means no,” the societal dialogue surrounding sexual consent (“consent” hereafter) reflects a complex imbrication of cultural, legal, and interpersonal dynamics. Although critical for the prevention of sexual assault (Muehlenhard et al., 2016), people rarely receive accurate, formal education on consent (Jozkowski & Crawford, 2016; Willis et al., 2019). Instead, many people learn about societally-normative sexual behavior – including consent – through interpersonal interactions or from media portrayals of sexuality (Brown et al., 2005; Hust et al., 2008; Jozkowski et al., 2019; Ward, 2003; Willis et al., 2020). The emergence of digital platforms, including erotic webcam sites, has introduced new contexts for sexual interactions, providing both opportunities and challenges for learning about consent. However, in contrast to conventional pornography, platforms like erotic webcam sites facilitate real-time communication and boundary-setting, enabling active participation in consent practices. Previous research (Bennett-Brown et al., 2023) suggests that skills learned within this particular digital context may be transferrable to offline experiences. In the current study, we examined the extent to which users of an erotic webcam site learned something new about consent from their time and interactions on the website.

Literature Review

Discussion surrounding consent is marked by a lack of consensus on its definition and the methods of its communication (e.g., Beres, 2007; Muehlenhard et al., 2016). The concept of consent may be understood in varying ways – as a mental act of willingness, a physical act of agreement, or a combination of both – with each perspective carrying its challenges. Internal states are inherently private and unobservable, making them difficult to observe and acknowledge; a reliance on non-verbal cues introduces ambiguity into the consent process; and explicit verbal consent is largely absent from normative sexual scripts, rendering affirmative consent a flawed approach (Muehlenhard et al., 2016). The distinction between consenting to and desiring sex, alongside varied views on how consent should be communicated and interpreted, add further complexity to understanding and practicing consent.

Much of the academic research on consent has been undertaken in populations of university students, as college and university women are particularly at risk for sexual violence (Jozkowski & Peterson, 2013; Muehlenhard et al., 2016). These studies and subsequent review syntheses have documented numerous (mis)understandings and practices around consent in the context of “hook-up culture” inherent on college campuses (Johnson & Hoover, 2015; Jozkowski & Peterson, 2013; Muehlenhard et al., 2016; Wood et al., 2019). In particular, this work has documented robust discrepancies in beliefs around who is able to consent to sexual activity – namely people who are not under the influence of alcohol or drugs, who understand what they are consenting to, and who are consenting without pressure or coercion – as well as when consent should be obtained (e.g., once before the onset of sexual activity, or repeatedly as part of an ongoing process; Beres, 2014; Humphreys, 2004).

Beyond the university setting, literature on consent in the context of sex work adds important nuance to this discourse. Radical feminist scholarship (e.g., Barry, 1979, 1995; Jeffreys, 1997; MacKinnon, 1987), for example, suggests that sex work is inherently and immutably coercive – deeming “real” consent within sex work impossible under the structural oppression of patriarchy. Jean (2015) clarified that sex work from this perspective does not discount the capacity to consent, but rather suggests that a lack of other material opportunities, as well as patriarchal sociocultural factors, undermines workers’ agency. Other scholars (e.g., Grant, 2014; Sullivan, 2016) and sex work advocacy groups (e.g., COYOTE) aim to contextualize sex work as a legitimate form of labor, where consent – and crucially, non-consent – is possible within this context. However, these groups also acknowledge that consent is potentially complicated by extenuating factors (e.g., gendered power asymmetries, economic exploitation), and advocate for more explicit improvements in working conditions to ameliorate this outcome.

Of note for the present research, only a few studies have examined consent within the context of digital sex or digital sex work. Most of the available studies have examined consent in online pornography, with findings showing contradictory associations between pornography viewing and consent behavior (McKee et al., 2021). Although only a minority of viewers report learning about consent from pornography (i.e., 13% of women, 23% of men; Martellozzo et al., 2016), many people – and especially young people – report that they learn about sex through their exposure to pornography (Rothman & Adhia, 2015; Rothman et al., 2015). While it is unclear how engagement with pornography shapes the practice of consent, content analyses have shown that contemporary pornographic films do often contain cues related to consent (Willis et al., 2020). Other research has shown that people typically identify the pornography they view as being consensual (Davis et al., 2018), suggesting the consent cues inherent in pornography are being noticed by viewers and could potentially be learned or internalized. Taken together, the available literature suggests that there may be observable consent cues or discussions around consent in the context of digital sex or digital sex work like pornography, but the extent to which people may learn about consent in these contexts, and specifically what about consent may be learned, is unclear.

The Camsite Context

The current research focuses on learning about consent through engagement with erotic webcam sites (“camsites”). Camsites such as LiveJasmin.com, Chaturbate, and MyFreeCams have become increasingly prevalent, attracting millions of monthly visitors (Lowry, 2016) – a figure that has reportedly surged as the interest in digital sex work rose among both potential clients and performers amidst the COVID-19 pandemic (Banerjee & Rao, 2021; Nelson et al., 2020; Rabouin, 2016; Zoledziowski, 2020). Although no large-scale reports have been published on the demographics of camsite users (i.e., clients), a recent study on the camsite Chaturbate suggests that users are likely to be men who are white and heterosexual (Milrod & Monto, 2023).

On camsites, users interact with live performers (“models”) who may perform/model requested acts in exchange for site credits (for in-depth explanation of camsites, see Jones, 2020). Users can engage with models one-on-one in a private session, or in a one-to-many public session with models performing on camera and many users in a chatroom-based audience. In a private session, users interact with models without the presence of other users and can co-create an individualized experience. Some users engage in many private sessions with the same model, and report developing close relationships characterized by emotional intimacy and self-disclosure (Bennett-Brown et al., 2023; Jones, 2020, 2022).

While private sessions can offer a more customized experience for the user, they are also more expensive than viewing a model from a chatroom audience in a one-to-many setting. As such, public sessions can include many users in the audience. In this option, users can communicate with models and other users through text. They can make requests of the model, asking for sexual or non-sexual acts, and “tip” to encourage the model to enact one’s request (e.g., to remove their clothing; Bleakley, 2014). In this audience-based setting, users may also observe how other users interact with models via text-based comments or requests, as well as how models react to the behaviors of other users, particularly harassment. Although the camsite exchange is centered around the desires and preferences of users, models retain the ability to block or ban users whose requests veer into verbal harassment (Jones, 2016).

Through their engagement with camsites, users could be learning about consent. Theoretical frameworks based on social-cognitive scripts, like Sexual Script Theory (Simon & Gagnon, 1986) and the Sexual Script Acquisition, Activation, Application Model (3AM; Wright, 2011), offer valuable perspectives for understanding how camsite users may learn about consent through their camsite experiences. Sexual Script Theory (Simon & Gagnon, 1986) and the 3AM (Wright, 2011) suggest that cognitive scripts underlie sexual behaviors and expectations, and influence how individuals interpret and respond to sexual situations. Scripts are cognitive frameworks acquired through cultural norms and socialization, and are activated in response to relevant stimuli as a guide for social navigation (Schank & Abelson, 1977). On camsites, users arrive with their own pre-formed sexual scripts – derived from lifelong societal messaging and previous experiences – but the structure of camsites may challenge those existing scripts and prompt modification. For example, research has shown that a widely held sexual script dictates that explicit communication around consent is non-normative or unnatural (Curtis & Burnett, 2017; Hickman & Muehlenhard, 1999; Muehlenhard et al., 2016; Willis et al., 2020). However, camsites are reliant on explicit sexual communication between users and models, either via audio or text. The digital environment has a lowered ability to convey non-verbal information, so requests and boundaries must often be explicitly communicated between users and models. The need to incorporate an off-script behavior into the sexual experience may prompt the emergence of a new, more explicitly communicative sexual script for camsite users.

Further, camsites challenge traditional sexual scripts around consent by involving a transactional element. Users typically pay per minute to interact with performers (Bleakley, 2014; Jones, 2020), introducing complexities around consent that can both enrich and complicate their sexual scripts. In addition to the effects of technological mediation and its lowered conveyance of non-verbal cues, the transactional nature of camsites also evokes a reliance on explicit sexual communication. Users spend money or site credits to purchase certain acts from performers. The acts that one performs or desires, as well as the cost, are determined prior to the performance, either via discussion or a performer’s posted list of services and prices (Bleakley, 2014). This explicitness could help foster a clearer understanding of consent, potentially encouraging users to articulate their desires and boundaries more openly both online and offline. This could also lead to the formation of new sexual scripts that may not have been as prominent in the user’s pre-camsite experiences – scripts that prioritize verbal consent, ongoing negotiation of sexual activities, and mutual respect among partners.

Although camsites have the potential to positively influence users’ sexual scripts, the transactional element also introduces the potential for detrimental script expansion. The commodification of sex may reinforce the problematic notion that consent to all sexual interactions can be bought, undermining the importance of personal agency. This could lead to the development of sexual scripts that devalue enthusiastic consent between partners and that prioritize transactional sexual interactions, both digitally and in person. Furthermore, the disparity in power dynamics – where users pay and performers provide – may translate into real-world sexual encounters, encouraging some individuals to view consent as entitlements rather than mutual agreements. Like research focused on consent within university settings and media representations, insights derived from camsites concerning consent are poised to be intricate and layered.

Present Study Overview

Exploring consent within camsite environments offers a unique perspective on the complexities of consent in unconventional settings, where transactional dynamics and online interactions have the potential to reshape established sexual scripts. In the current study, we explored whether users have learned about consent through their camsite engagement. A sample of 5,828 users reported whether they had learned something new about consent from using a camsite, and if so, they qualitatively described what information they had learned. We thematically coded the qualitative responses and examined themes. Our findings contribute to a deeper understanding of how digital platforms, including camsites, influence the processes of learning about and practicing consent.

Method

Participants

Participants (N = 5,828) were mostly men (99%), heterosexual (91%), and white in race/ethnicity (85%). Age ranged from 18 to 99 years (M = 42 years, SD = 13 years). In terms of their camsite background and activity, 52% of participants had an account on the camsite for five or more years, 31% for two to four years, and 17% for one year or less. Most (69%) reported having more than 20 one-on-one sessions with cam models over the span of their account. In the last month, they spent an average of 23 hours on the site (Median = 10 hours, SD = 46 hours). On average, 40% spent less than $100 per month on the camsite, 31% spent between $100 and $250, 15% between $251 and $500, and 15% spent $500 or more per month.

Procedure

Participants were recruited from LiveJasmin.com, a popular camsite. After logging into their account on the camsite, participants saw an advertisement for the survey in a banner at the bottom of their screen that read, “Help science! Take a quick survey about LiveJasmin.” The link routed participants to a Qualtrics-based online survey connected to the first author’s university account. Clicking the advertisement was voluntary.

Because we did not want to collect any identifying information, we did not require participants to sign an Informed Consent form. Instead, participants reviewed a Study Information Sheet (SIS) that detailed the study procedure, risks, and benefits of participation, and clicked to agree to participate. Next, participants completed a brief survey aimed to understand changes to users’ knowledge about sex and sexuality. Prior to the survey launch, it was decided that the survey would remain active and advertised for one week; no a priori power analyses were conducted. All study materials were reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board at Indiana University. Note that although the larger study was funded by Byborg Enterprises, the owner of LiveJasmin.com Byborg Enterprises was not involved in writing, analyses, or publication decisions for this manuscript.

Measures

Participant Demographics

Participants reported their age, gender, race and ethnicity, and sexual orientation.

Camsite Behavior

Participants reported how long they had an account on LiveJasmin (less than 3 months; 3–5 months; 6–11 months; 1 year; 2 years; 3 years; 4 years; 5 or more years), how many hours they spent on LiveJasmin in the last month (open text entry; responses beyond possible hours in a month and outliers beyond ±2SD coded as missing), how many times they had one-on-one sessions with cam models on LiveJasmin (never, once or twice, 3–5 times, 6–10 times, 11–20 times, more than 20 times), and how much money they typically spend per month on LiveJasmin (less than $100, $100–$250, $251-$500, $501-$1000, $1001-$2500, more than $2500, and prefer not to answer).

Learning About Consent

Participants were shown the instructions, “During your time on LiveJasmin, have any of the following occurred? Select all that apply,” and were given a list of 17 possible occurrences (e.g., “I’ve learned something new about my own sexual pleasure;” “I’ve become more comfortable talking about sex in general”). Of note for the current study, participants could select “I’ve learned something new about sexual consent.” If participants selected this item, they were presented with an open text box on a subsequent page of the survey that asked, “Since you’ve been using LiveJasmin, what have you learned about sexual consent?” Participants’ typed-in responses comprise the qualitative data used below.

Data Analysis

We examined descriptive statistics for whether participants reported learning something new about sexual consent (1 = did learn something new, 0 = did not). To analyze qualitative responses, we conducted thematic analysis based on Braun and Clarke’s (2006) guidelines. This type of analysis is used to identify themes or patterns present in the data, and to simplify while retaining rich details present in participants’ responses. We used an inductive approach, with themes being generated from the data, rather than approaching the dataset with a prearranged coding scheme. Because participants typed their responses into the survey, transcription was not needed; thematic analyses were conducted on unmodified responses. We did not use specialized coding software. Instead, our analyses proceeded as follows.

We first put all qualitative responses into a spreadsheet. We selected a random 10% of those responses to examine as a basis for planning the initial codebook. As a group, we reviewed the 10% and generated codes capturing the responses expressed by participants. This became our first codebook. From inspecting the 10% subgroup, we decided to give each response a single code based on the primary lesson learned. Few responses in the overall dataset expressed more than one lesson learned (n = 15; 6.20%); for those, we assigned a single code based on the first or primary lesson explained. Secondary codes were noted but not included in calculations of interrater reliability.

After creating the codebook together, we independently coded the full set of responses. To address the wider array of lessons learned, our codebook needed expansion and refinement. We met to modify our codebook, before independently recoding all responses. In total, we conducted four rounds of independent coding and codebook refinement. Each round involved removing redundant codes and organizing other codes into core themes and subthemes.

After we reached an appropriate level of interrater agreement for the entire sample (k = .75), we finalized our codebook. Together we reviewed responses where less than three of the four raters assigned the same code (n = 29) and came to consensus. At this point, all responses were assigned a single code representing their primary lesson learned, or in the minority of cases where multiple lessons were equally expressed, their first-mentioned lesson.

Results

Of the overall sample (N = 5,828), 12% (n = 699) reported learning something new about sexual consent from their time on the camsite.

Qualitative Responses

Within the group of 699 participants, 252 (36%) gave a typed response about lessons or knowledge they had learned about consent. We identified eight overarching themes within those typed responses, along with a “not applicable” category. In order of frequency, the themes were: (1) lessons related to respect/respecting boundaries; (2) lessons related to explicit consent; (3) lessons related to perceiving consent as dynamic; (4) lessons related to camsite work or environment; (5) lessons related to the general importance of consent; (6) lessons related to perceiving consent as negotiable; (7) lessons related to the enjoyment of consent; and (8) lessons related to intimate connection and consent; along with (9) not applicable or not enough information. Themes are described in detail and illustrated with quotes below. With each quote, we provide participants’ race/ethnicity, age, and length of their account on the LiveJasmin website for additional context. All quoted participants identified as men unless otherwise specified. To maintain the integrity of participants’ responses, we present unedited quotes.

Lessons Related to Respect/Respecting Boundaries

When reporting what they had learned about sexual consent from their camsite engagement, 22.6% (n = 57) of responses were about respect, or about recognizing and respecting someone else’s boundaries, with some learning this lesson in connection with the transactional element of user–model interactions. For example, one participant noted “that even thought i paid, i couldnet get what i wanted and learnt to be cool with that and respect bounderies” (white, 23 years old, 3 years on the site). Relatedly, participants observed that within this transactional context, consent also entailed extending personhood to the performers (e.g.,“ to respect the model as a woman, not just an object of desire” – white, 56 years old, 2 years on the site) as well as agency (e.g., “She can say yes or no, I tell her she can do whatever she’s comfortable with” – multiracial, 52 years old, 5+ years on the site). More broadly, these responses also included details about the importance of ensuring that both parties are comfortable with the sexual activity or request (e.g., “sex should not be forced or uncomfortable, it is a mutual satisfaction” – white, 73 years old, 5+ years on the site) and that both parties want – and need – to be involved (e.g., “That it should not be demanded upon but mutually agreed upon and respecting each so that the two participants can enjoy each other” –selected “another race/ethnicity not listed,” age not given, 5+ years on the site; “I’ve learned that giving control to someone and having control over someone else is earned and should be treated with care and trust” – white, 46 years old, 5+ years on the site).

Lessons Related to Explicit Consent

In 17% (n = 43) of responses, participants detailed new understandings of the verbal communication of consent. These responses largely included an understanding that “no means no” (e.g., “If a woman says no, it ALWAYS means no. Silence is not consent” – white, 28 years old, 5+ years on the site), although some reported learning specifically how to ask for consent from partners (e.g., “how to ask without losing the moment, and how consent makes things sexier and builds trust” – white, 39 years old, 5+ years on the site). Participants highlighted the importance of asking prior to doing something new (e.g., “I always like to ask first before trying something different than anything before and if my partner isn’t comfortable then we figure out something different” – Black/African-American, 26 years old, less than 3 months on the site) and of gaining explicit consent through establishing how consent is defined (e.g., “Consistently being more explicit in obtaining it and checking what it means” – white, 45 years old, 4 years on the site).

Lessons Related to Perceiving Consent as Dynamic

In 12.7% (n = 32) of responses, participants reported learning that the concept of consent is a dynamic, ongoing process, and that consent is unique to the individual. The responses associated with this theme indicated that consent depends upon the person – some may be comfortable with certain behaviors or acts, while some may not be. One participant provided the following in response to being asked what he had learned about consent from his camsite engagement:

That it’s a bit slippery. Some women prefer pushy things and admitted to having fantasies involving teasing guys until they cannot control themselves. Others have hard “no” lines that should be respected. And I learned that in dom-sum relationships subs have more power than doms.

  – white, 36 years old, 3 to 6 months on the site

Some of these responses noted the importance of understanding individual differences in non-verbal communication around consent (e.g., “Body language and vocal tonality, signs of discomfort. I’ve learned to always give space to exit a situation” – Hispanic/Latino, 30 years old, 5+ years on the site). Others observed that there may be cultural differences in what behaviors require consent (e.g., “The cultural differences and expectations from non US countries” – age, gender, and race/ethnicity not given; 5+ years on the site). Finally, some responses noted that consent can change over time, and can be revoked after initially agreeing. One participant stated, “It’s a constant thing that needs some of your focus at all times. People have to be able to say they’re no longer ok with what you are ok with at any time during the experience” (white, 44 years old, 5+ years on the site).

Lessons Related to Camsite Work or Environment

In 10.7% (n = 27) of responses, participants indicated learning something about consent that was specific to the camsite environment or the transactional nature of camming. These responses often indicated an understanding that a person’s ability to give true or honest consent is impacted when a commercial element is incorporated. For example, one participant noted, “On LiveJasmin, girls don’t have a choice but to follow the site rules. However, I find myself disgusted in such implicit consent” (white, 32 years old, 1 year on the site). Other participants expressed learning similar lessons, with specific focus on learning to determine whether a model is consenting because of a true desire to perform the act or because of a financial need. For example, one participant reported learning, “How to notice when someone is doing something only because you paid them and not because they enjoyed it’’ (white, 29 years old, 5+ years on the site) while another reported, “I realize that women receiving living wages from their work might be reluctant to turn down pay, so since it is important to me to have their fully voluntary participation in whatever we do” (white, 50 years old, 3 years on the site).

Lessons Related to the General Importance of Consent

In 9.5% (n = 24) of responses, participants reported that they had learned that consent is required or important for a sexual interaction (e.g., “It is essential to have” – white, 57 years old, 5+ years on the site) or that consent is “foundational” to the sexual experience (e.g. “It is the base of any sexual relationship” – white, 49 years old, 5+ years on the site). Another participant was very candid in their response, sharing a personal experience that illustrated why consent is so fundamental to their interactions: “Bro. Tough question. Also great question. I understand now that consent is very important. Case in point… girl puts fingers in her butt when i don’t want to see. FUCKING YIKES” (white, 37 years old, 4 years on the site).

Lessons Related to Perceiving Consent as Negotiable

In 3.6% (n = 9) of responses, participants reported learning that consent can be obtained through negotiation (e.g., “replace consent with negotiations” – white, 33 years old, 1 year on the site; “Some girls it’s negotiable” – white, 31 years old, 2 years on the site) or through wearing one’s partner down (e.g., “That it differs a lot how clear boundaries women set around themselves, and how easy or hard it is to talk them into stuff” – selected “another race/ethnicity not listed,” 51 years old, 5+ years on the site). In other words, although a model might initially express resistance or a clear lack of consent, users report learning to view this as malleable; these users appear to believe they can obtain consent through coercion. Some participants also observed that other camsite users behave as if consent is negotiable or even unnecessary (e.g., “I learnt that a lot of people do not seem to care about others limits and are too focussed on what they want, disregarding the models boundaries” – white, 28 years old, 5+ years on the site). Highlighting how some users seem to enjoy convincing models to engage in behavior that they do not initially consent to, they noted:

Not many men on here seem to respect [whether the model consents]. It seems that most men get off on them doing something “they wouldnt usually do,” by throwing money at them. I am unsure how many women cave in to this, or if there’s such a thing as coerced consent.

  – white, 31 years old, 5+ years on the site

While users may or may not have internalized this perspective, this participant’s response demonstrates the confusion that these norms present to their existing views or scripts surrounding consent.

Lessons Related to the Enjoyment of Consent

Next, 3.2% (n = 8) of responses indicated participants had learned that consent feels good. These responses detailed how the process of obtaining consent made sexual experiences more pleasurable or enjoyable for themselves, for the models, or for both. One participant stated learning, “Consent is important to my enjoyment of an interaction” (white, 41 years old, 6 to 11 months on the site). Another participant suggested that “Asking for consent and seeking consent makes everyone feel more sexy” (white, 28 years old, 5+ years on the site).

Lessons Related to Intimate Connection and Consent

In 2% (n = 5) of responses, participants detailed learning about the emotional aspects of consent, how seeking and giving consent builds relationships between partners, or that the process of consent creates emotional intimacy. Example responses from this category were “consent is the beginning of something deeper than the basic connection of a new meeting” (selected “another race/ethnicity not listed,” 26 years old, 4 years on the site) and “Yes, of course, it’s not always about sex but the time you spend getting to know the person you are with” (white, 63 years old, 5+ years on the site).

Not Applicable or Not Enough Information

Finally, 18.7% (n = 47) of responses were inapplicable to the question or did not provide enough information for the research team to fully understand the participants’ sentiment. Most of these responses were inapplicable and consisted of only a few words (e.g., “Fuck,” “Very much,” or “definitely”). In others, it was apparent that some participants seem to have misread “consent” as “content,” misinterpreting the question as asking what new information they had learned about online sexual content (i.e., sexual media). One participant asked a clarifying question of “content or consent?” (white, 61 years old, 2 years on the site) while another participant responded with “the difference about toy, dildo, vibro, lush” (white, 41 years old, 6 to 11 months on the site), all of which are sex toys that some models use on the site.

Discussion

Emerging forms of sexual technologies have created new opportunities for learning about and practicing sexual consent (e.g., Marcantonio et al., 2023). In the current study, we examined the extent to which 5,828 camsite users learned something new about sexual consent from their time on a camsite. Camsites are unique contexts due to their interactive, live nature, which contrasts with the more passive consumption of prerecorded pornography and the physical dynamics of in-person sex work. Camsites offer opportunities for real-time communication, negotiation, and the establishment of personal boundaries, providing a space where users could actively engage in and observe consent practices. Moving beyond the predominant focus on college and university populations in consent research, our findings illuminate the role of personalized, interactive camsite experiences in shaping consent understanding. This investigation not only extends knowledge on digital platforms’ influence on sexual norms and behaviors but also underscores the dual potential of these spaces to both foster and challenge positive consent practices.

Our results showed that more than one in ten participants (12%) reported learning something new about sexual consent from the camsite context. In our qualitative data, eight themes (and an additional “not applicable” category) emerged from participants’ responses. These themes reflected a diverse range of experiences and learning outcomes in this context. The most prevalent theme was “lessons related to respect/respecting boundaries,” which was present in nearly one-quarter of responses. This theme highlights that even within a transactional setting, the importance of recognizing agency and personhood remains paramount. Contrary to both radical feminist literature and legal scholarship that suggests clients inherently participate in the dehumanization of sex workers (Farley, 2004; Wilson & Butler, 2014), these findings suggest that some camsite users have learned to view models as individuals with their own particular boundaries and limitations. Some users seem to understand that their willingness to pay does not automatically translate to services rendered; rather, models can choose whether they perform particular acts, as well as revoke access to users who do not respect these boundaries. These findings are consistent with client-centered scholarship (Mower, 2020) that emphasizes how clients in full-service sex work often respect both the legal and personal boundaries of the models. Although the extent to which these lessons can or will extend beyond the camming setting is unclear, a better understanding of personal agency and respect for boundaries has potential to greatly enhance future sexual interactions – both digitally and in person.

Learning the importance of personhood and personal agency was also apparent for participants who expressed learning that sexual consent can be dynamic. Around one in ten participant responses (12.7%) involved learning that consent can differ from person to person, from one visit to the next, or within an ongoing interaction. Sexual consent scholars emphasize the ongoing and reversible nature of consent as crucial, noting that consent can change or be revoked at any time (Jozkowski et al., 2014; Marcantonio et al., 2023). It seems that for some users, the camsite environment facilitated an understanding of these critical nuances of sexual consent.

“Lessons related to explicit consent” was the second most common theme in participants’ qualitative responses. Participants reported learning the importance of verbal communication about sex, including the importance of directly asking the model for specific sexual behaviors. Research has shown that widely held sexual scripts dictate that explicit communication around sexual consent is unnatural (Curtis & Burnett, 2017; Muehlenhard et al., 2016; Willis et al., 2020). This learning outcome – that explicit communication of sexual consent is valuable – represents a challenge to the sexual scripts users likely held prior to their camsite use, and suggests that users’ sexual scripts are being modified by their time and interactions on camsites. Although we may expect direct sexual communication to be off-putting, as it goes against traditional sexual scripts (e.g., Curtis & Burnett, 2017; Muehlenhard et al., 2016; Willis et al., 2020), specific technological affordances like anonymity (Evans et al., 2017) may encourage more openness, vulnerability, and comfort in users, compared to in-person sexual experiences. Relatedly, even though features like anonymity would likely not be present in face-to-face situations relevant to sexual consent, lessons learned about consent from camsite interactions may transcend this environment.

Although the digital environment may provide beneficial features, most participants did not explicitly mention the camming context or how camming prompted their learning. This may suggest that the lessons learned from camming interactions can be applicable to sexual experiences outside the camming context, or that participants do not distinguish between consent in this context and outside of it. Previous work (Bennett-Brown et al., 2023), for example, demonstrates that experiences within the camsite context can improve interpersonal communication skills, and that these developments are transferable to in-person, non-transactional interactions. Similarly, lessons learned about consent – regardless of the computer-mediated nature of camsites – might also transcend this environment and inform behaviors and attitudes toward consent in other sexual and romantic contexts.

Relatedly, when participants did detail how camming prompted their learning, they largely noted interactions with models as their source for their new knowledge. Although public or audience-based sessions can be quite popular with users (Jones, 2020), very few participants reported learning about consent from observing the behavior of other users in those audience-based sessions. This suggests that complexity around consent may be best learned from direct, personal experience rather than through social observation. Nonetheless, the communal aspect of the camming environment provides a novel context for learning about some aspects of consent. Although many of our participants reported learning to respect boundaries, some also noticed disrespectful behavior from other users in the group setting, and subsequent consequences enacted by the models or other users. This subset of users reported observing negative, antithetical messages about consent in the group setting – but not necessarily internalizing these messages. However, it is possible that those who already hold these inaccurate beliefs (e.g., that consent can be achieved by wearing someone down) may find validation in the behavior of others. That is, the particular behaviors observed – alongside a lack of significant or severe consequences – might reinforce an understanding of consent that runs counter to positive societal norms and expectations, at least amongst a small percentage of camsite users. As such, some users may be learning accurate and/or inaccurate lessons about consent through observing the behaviors and consequences of other camsite users in group-based settings.

Most notably, participants who did specifically mention their interactions with the models – or the concept of consent within camming – admitted that respecting boundaries around consent is significantly more complex when the commercial context of these interactions comes into play. From some participants’ perspective, the interplay of work and sex raises questions about the models’ ability to consent; specifically, whether the promise – and, in some cases, necessity – of financial compensation creates a coercive environment in which models are less-than-enthusiastic participants. Other participants, however, suggested that the power dynamics of the platform skews toward the models, enabling them to revoke a user’s access to their content if their boundaries are not being respected. For many participants, these conflicting perspectives seem to exist simultaneously. This complex interplay raises questions about perceived coercion and the authenticity of consent within a transactional framework that mirrors those asked in the context of in-person sex work. This tension also underlines how perceptions of consent are informed by social norms toward particular sexual contexts (i.e., commercial vs. noncommercial interactions), where differing expectations of consent persist as a result of potentially ambiguous power asymmetries. To that end, the transactional element of camming, rather than the computer-mediated nature of these sites, may limit the possibility of these attitudes transferring to other noncommercial romantic and sexual contexts.

Despite this ambiguity, the sample of participants’ responses suggest that many have learned that a particular standard of consent – one built on respecting the autonomy and individual boundaries of one’s partner – applies to the camming context. For example, several participants noted that in order for these particular experiences to be understood as consensual, being attentive to what the models are communicating – especially implicitly – is essential. These clients’ perspectives emphasize that consent hinges on mutual respect and awareness of their partner’s well-being, particularly in this commercial sexual context.

Limitations

Despite the insights gleaned from our thematic analysis of participants’ responses, we acknowledge the high proportion of inapplicable or uninterpretable answers in the dataset (18.7%). The relatively large number of responses that did not appropriately answer the survey question represents a methodological shortcoming: the survey questions were not clear for a segment of respondents or did not resonate with them. Relatedly, because we collected qualitative data through open text boxes embedded in an online survey, participants may not have included as much detail in their responses as they may in more formal interviews. Overall, our method may have yielded a less comprehensive and detail-rich set of responses than more in-depth qualitative work.

We did not define sexual consent in the survey tool, adding further limitation. This omission may have created confusion for participants and led to the low rate of qualitative responses. Moreover, we did not collect data on the specific ways in which participants learned something new about consent (i.e., the mechanism) or on participants’ understandings of consent prior to their use of camsites. These details are essential for a global perspective on how engagement with camsites produces shifts in users’ knowledge of consent.

Additionally, our sample of camsite users cannot be generalized to the camsite user population as a whole. Participation in our survey was voluntary; only those who were willing to spend time on our survey and to disclose their camsite behavior were present in our sample. Many users may have opted not to participate due to stigma associated with participating in online sex work (Pryor & Reeder, 2011). Camsite users with more internalized stigma toward online sex work may differ from users with less internalized stigma in ways that matter for learning or practicing sexual consent in this context. For those who did participate, it is unclear why only 36% of participants who reported learning something new about sexual consent provided a qualitative response at all. Future research should aim to implement more thorough qualitative methodology, and to better understand how individual differences in camsite users could contribute to disparate experiences and outcomes from using the site.

Finally, the demographic distribution of our sample limits the generalizability of our findings. Nearly every participant in the survey identified as a heterosexual, white man. We did not measure additional demographic variables such as education level, general technology use, or participants’ household income. These demographics may be related to preexisting knowledge of consent or to differences in technological behavior, including visiting camsites. Future research should endeavor to collect these variables, as well as a more diverse sample including women and non-binary people, queer-identifying people, and people of different racial and ethnic backgrounds.

Conclusion

Our findings show that a sizable minority of camsite users report learning new information about sexual consent as a result of their time spent on camsites. This suggests that the camsite environment has the potential to challenge and reshape traditional sexual scripts, potentially fostering a space where consent is verbalized more openly and personal boundaries are respected. However, the transactional nature of user–model relationships adds complexity to understanding consent in this context; some users reported struggling to reconcile the financial element with models’ true ability to consent to sexual activity, while others seemed to believe that the models’ acceptance of payment signaled their consent to all requests. Although further research is needed to illustrate how lessons learned in the camsite context may transfer to other contexts (e.g., in-person partnered sexual activity), these findings spotlight the educative potential of interactive sexual technologies like camsites, and expand the emerging body of literature on the instructive value of adult online spaces (Döring et al., 2021; Lippmann et al., 2023; Marcantonio et al., 2023).

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

Amanda Gesselman is the Primary Investigator on a project funded by Byborg Enterprises, owner of the website LiveJasmin.com. The funder was not involved in the design of the survey from which the current manuscript drew data, and was not involved in the analyses, writing, or decision to publish the current manuscript.