Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The ‘E-Pimps’ of OnlyFans

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 187 posts

Re: The ‘E-Pimps’ of OnlyFans

#91

Post by bluescrn »

krageon wrote: post #81
framapotari wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Naivety seems to imply that what they are doing is wrong, or a mistake, but they don't understand it fully. Don't you think that's a paternalistic view? Do you know what's best for those women?

Clearly the poster thinks they do know what is best, it's just that it's founded on more than paternalistic views: They seem to equate sex work with gambling, which tastes fundamentally puritan.

They can both seem like easy money. For most people they aren't. And there's a very real risk of long-term negative consequences.

Re: The ‘E-Pimps’ of OnlyFans

#92

Post by samoa42 »

codebolt wrote: post #80
abigail95 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Negotiating different rates with different subscribers for the same video price discrimination is good! For the rest of it, banning porn is probably a losing battle, but surely we can make fraud illegal, like passing yourself off as someone else. For the rest of the what-ifs, do nothing, or call the police. I don't think pornographers should have a special duty to act over a shopkeeper or bus driver.

A lot can change over a decades time. I hope and believe that porn will eventually be a lot more restricted than it is today, as the societal downsides become more and more apparent.

> societal downsides become more and more apparent

not sure, but in the greater picture of overpopulation, porn seems to be a cheap and effective measure compared to medical/physical alternatives.

Re: The ‘E-Pimps’ of OnlyFans

#93

Post by yieldcrv »

numerik_meister wrote: post #71
yieldcrv wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me, we need a better word given the overlap with all other kinds of managers and platforms. Just because a woman and her body is involved for attention and payment, anybody getting any payment and involvement is called a pimp? Where's the coercion, destruction, trafficking? Where are the people that really do lack agency and autonomy? There should be two different words, one for the destructive thing that's regula…

The website is taking advantage of the naivety of young women. I would not call it "benign management", just like, for example, I would also not say that online casinos are "benign" just because they are fully legal. Then it would be more appropriate to say that the website is not a pimp, but a madam.

Can you elaborate on the naivety? Your view?

I know of some naive people, I know of some cunning people, I know of some extremely high functioning people that have a business plan, I know of some extremely goofy people that don't know what to do with all the money they make, I know of many people with paltry earnings. Many people have multiple of these attributes at once.

I don't think brothel terms are really accurate or necessary. You are mapping due to some overlap of erotica and women. There are so many other intermediaries that can be applied to these terms better, such as the businesses that let people rent rooms to record in, with better lighting and setup than they have at home. But even then, we should use a more applicable word, as they are not brothels with madams or pimps, no matter whether they have great collaborate management, or management issues.

Re: The ‘E-Pimps’ of OnlyFans

#95

Post by progrus »

samoa42 wrote: post #92
codebolt wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot can change over a decades time. I hope and believe that porn will eventually be a lot more restricted than it is today, as the societal downsides become more and more apparent.

> societal downsides become more and more apparent not sure, but in the greater picture of overpopulation, porn seems to be a cheap and effective measure compared to medical/physical alternatives.

I guess when your benchmark is genocide, it doesn’t seem like that big of a deal.

Re: The ‘E-Pimps’ of OnlyFans

#96

Post by hansel_der »

mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote: post #78

I've noticed that there is a huge amount of these models, including many Russians, offering "dick ratings". I always felt it likely at least some of these are managed by FSB as a way to gain blackmail material on western citizens. I have no evidence that's the case, except that it would be extremely doable and probably very effective.

quite sure you're overthinking it.

a picture of some random dick does not qualify as blackmail material.

Re: The ‘E-Pimps’ of OnlyFans

#97

Post by scoutt »

rsynnott wrote: post #89
capableweb wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know a person who in the last years moved from doing sex work in the physical world, to using OnlyFans and other online resources since Covid began. Initially, she didn't offer "dick ratings" but there was so many requests for her to do it, that she started doing it. Now most of her profits is simply from people who want her to rate their dick. She's not Russian or have any affiliation to Russia. I think people are…

Simply submit the relevant evidence, and in two to four weeks, you receive a 15 page report, stamped by the Inspector of Dicks. I mean, that's how I'm imagining it.

One could speed up things by having a ML model for rating dicks.

Until someone creates thisdickdoesnotexist.com to game the system.

PS: apparently the domain is up. IDK... I ran out of original ideas.

Re: The ‘E-Pimps’ of OnlyFans

#98

Post by samoa42 »

bergenty wrote: post #47
Overtonwindow wrote: post #6

I 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.

I never understood the phone sex pull. It’s just a voice you can’t see anything and the person on the other end could be hideous.

glory hole et.al.

Re: The ‘E-Pimps’ of OnlyFans

#99

Post by mtlmtlmtlmtl »

hansel_der wrote: post #96
mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote: post #78

I've noticed that there is a huge amount of these models, including many Russians, offering "dick ratings". I always felt it likely at least some of these are managed by FSB as a way to gain blackmail material on western citizens. I have no evidence that's the case, except that it would be extremely doable and probably very effective.

quite sure you're overthinking it. a picture of some random dick does not qualify as blackmail material.

Nude pictures don't qualify as blackmail material? Clearly they do, to some people, as there are numerous cases of nudes being used for extortion.

I doesn't seem far fetched that there could be a significant overlap between men who have enough insecurity about themselves to pay for the service, and men who would be amenable to blackmail using said photos.

Besides, it's not just the photo. Likely other things were shared as well, and the embarassment of having paid for online sexting might be more than enough for some people. Especially if they're married...

Re: The ‘E-Pimps’ of OnlyFans

#100

Post by samoa42 »

progrus wrote: post #95
samoa42 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> societal downsides become more and more apparent not sure, but in the greater picture of overpopulation, porn seems to be a cheap and effective measure compared to medical/physical alternatives.

I guess when your benchmark is genocide, it doesn’t seem like that big of a deal.

wouldn't call it genocide because it is not a selective measure. but yea, "preventing births" does qualify
Post reply on HN