The ‘E-Pimps’ of OnlyFans
nytimes.com
The ‘E-Pimps’ of OnlyFans
1–10 of 187 posts
Re: The ‘E-Pimps’ of OnlyFans
#2Re: The ‘E-Pimps’ of OnlyFans
#3Wild.. Would love to see a documentary about this.
Re: The ‘E-Pimps’ of OnlyFans
#4These “pimps” serve as surrogates for the cammer, (consensually) impersonating them so that the cammer’s account can engage with more subscribers.
I wonder how convincing something like GPT-3 would be at this. I give it 5 years tops for 100% AI OnlyFans accounts to be commonplace, complete with artificial personalized livestreams.
Re: The ‘E-Pimps’ of OnlyFans
#5Sounds like a click-baity way of saying "social media manager."
Re: The ‘E-Pimps’ of OnlyFans
#6I wonder if people realize that they are communicating with the new version of a phone sex line. It seems a little dishonest. Before the Internet, people could call the sex lines and talk to people, and it was your imagination. With the Internet, and only fans, all of the media, it seems disingenuous and a little bit like a scam.
Re: The ‘E-Pimps’ of OnlyFans
#7This definitely happens elsewhere, like live cam sites.
This isn't a new practice, but the stakes are higher.
It used to be that you could write to "celebrities" for an autograph. You hoped it was the celebrity who signed your thing and mailed it back, but in reality you knew it was probably their spouse or secretary. It wasn't honest, but it's not like they charged you money, and the emotional stakes were lower. They weren't pretending they were your buddy or your lover. They were just signing a thing for you.
With online adult media, there's that whole parasocial dynamic. The whole thing is made to make you feel like you have something like a personal connection with the model.
I wonder if there's a way to do it ethically, while also keeping it fun for the subscriber.
Like honestly the answer might just be transparency. ex: "Sometimes my assistant XYZ helps me answer the huge volume of messages I get. We'll always sign our replies with the name of the person who actually wrote the reply." etc.
Re: The ‘E-Pimps’ of OnlyFans
#8I wonder if people realize that they are communicating with the new version of a phone sex line. It seems a little dishonest. Before the Internet, people could call the sex lines and talk to people, and it was your imagination. With the Internet, and only fans, all of the media, it seems disingenuous and a little bit like a scam.
Ultimately if users are satisfied and happy, does it even matter if it is fake? The end goal is not to create a real relationship, it is to create a happy fantasy for the buyer.
Re: The ‘E-Pimps’ of OnlyFans
#9I wonder if people realize that they are communicating with the new version of a phone sex line. It seems a little dishonest. Before the Internet, people could call the sex lines and talk to people, and it was your imagination. With the Internet, and only fans, all of the media, it seems disingenuous and a little bit like a scam.
Is it really all that different than the old phone sex lines? I’m not old enough to know, but I’d presume there’d be some visual accompanying said ads — perhaps a woman more attractive than the real one on the other end of the phone?
Re: The ‘E-Pimps’ of OnlyFans
#10This definitely happens elsewhere, like live cam sites. This isn't a new practice, but the stakes are higher. It used to be that you could write to "celebrities" for an autograph. You hoped it was the celebrity who signed your thing and mailed it back, but in reality you knew it was probably their spouse or secretary. It wasn't honest, but it's not like they charged you money, and the emotional stakes were lower. The…
Another way to be sort of honest is use letterhead that says "From the desk of Tom Cruise", that doesn't mean Tom Cruise wrote it just that it came from a desk he owns. The stamped signature is his approval of the message, sort of like when political ads say "I'm Bob Dole and I approved this message".