But N doesn't matter!

I could be wrong, but I am of the opinion that most women understand a past in professional pornography is unlikely to be considered a marital plus, as is the case in this unfortunate case of belated disclosure:

My wife and I have been married for five years. I recently discovered that she made between 10 and 20 porn videos when she was 19. We got married when she was 27. We have four kids from two previous marriages. I am devastated. When I confronted her about it, she cried harder than I had ever seen. She said she was lost, and it's the biggest regret of her entire life.

Apparently she was either caught off-guard or wasn't quick enough to turn the situation around and make it all his fault for watching porn.  But consider that we're probably talking an N of somewhere between 10 and 50 on the basis of the professional activity alone.  For the sake of argument, we'll settle on 30.

If women are capable of grasping that it is extremely distasteful for a man to marry a woman with an N of 30 on the basis of her career in film, then why is it difficult for some of them to understand that providing the same sexual services free of charge is not any more acceptable to men, regardless of whether or not there were cameras involved?

A basic rule of film-making is that the monster is always more frightening when it isn't shown.  So, the idea that the pornographic past is intrinsically worse than an equally high amateur N is dubious.  After all, what's worse.  A woman telling you that she did it for the money, or because she simply wanted to.  And who is more likely to be unfaithful, the woman who historically puts out for cash or the woman who historically puts out because she just feels like it?