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

Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

matthewball.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 878 posts

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#411

Post by habinero »

beaglesss wrote: post #196
habinero wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Education level is less important than equality is. Marriage is traditionally a terrible bargain for women, but it was the only choice they were allowed to make. Now, they can make their money and buy property and have kids on their own. A lot of men haven't realized the era of the provider is over and dead, and they're now optional. They have to make women want to be with them, and a lot of women just aren't willing…

>lot of men haven't realized the era of the provider is over and dead, and they're now optional. Cool, child support and alimony optional now. Right? Because it's always easy to be independent with OPM. People forget single moms became far more practiced after the state incentivized breaking up families.

Why does that matter if they don't marry anyone? They control the means of reproduction, after all.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#412

Post by rybosworld »

It does seem like the business preys on, primarily teenage boys, in a way that traditional pornography does not.

If you look up the user demographics, you'll notice an obvious problem: The demographics do not include the number of users under 18.

https://techreport.com/statistics/software-web/onlyfans-stat...

Some may say: well that's because you have to be 18 to use the site. But that's not true. Anyone can signup for onlyfans without entering their age. Onlyfans only does age verification for creators.

If you think this site isn't primarily being used by teenagers, then I have a bridge to sell you.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#413

Post by alt227 »

almatabata wrote: post #340
highcountess wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Any healthy society would ban all OF type content immediately on national security threat grounds By this logic we should ban all extra marital relationships as well. Add to that mandatory DNA tests for all kids just in case. People will do things in private that they do not want known. No amount of legislation will fix it.

I agree with what you are saying, and people should definitely be allowed to do whatever they like in private as long as it is legal and consentual.

That said, OF is not private, and that kind of negates your point.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#415

Post by makeitdouble »

SecretDreams wrote: post #296
makeitdouble wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because clearly it’s not about the content per see which is a dim a dozen and available for free in trove. I think you should step back and look at it with a bit of distance. Is the content they're paying for really the same as you think is available for free, and do they even get it under the same conditions, in morality and circumstance. Not knowing your life, it feels like you could have said the same towards pe…

But the OP is right about the parasocial aspect. OF content and other such platforms is about the personalization aspect. Sure, there's some kinks/fetishes too.. but it is primarily about engagement. In some ways, it's just an explicit, subscription based, social media platform where it feels like you're being treated uniquely... But most times you are not.

> it feels like you're being treated uniquely... But most times you are not.

That's just any customer business.

When you go buy a house it feels like the agent is really looking at your personal circumstances and trying hard to be your friend. When you go cut your hair the staff will remember your name and ask about your day. Your dentist will keep track of your operations, personalize your care and make sure you're in trust and as comfortable as possible.

There's really nothing special about having people you pay be friendly with you.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#416

Post by habinero »

benterix wrote: post #154
habinero wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's true for every part of the human experience. People discriminate because of religion, etc. Sounds like you care too much about what other people think of you. Anyways, my point is this sort of thing is rapidly becoming something nobody cares about, and that's due to feminism and it's a good thing.

While I somewhat agree with you, feminism and related ideologies created a whole new network of concepts of what is good and wrong, and these can bite you as much as the old prejudices. A good example is the Harry Potter lady: while I don't necessarily agree with her view, I do understand her concern and the right to express it - but for many people it's a criminal offense. Almost as if we replaced one cage with anot…

If JKR is your worst example of feminism, we're just fine. She's extremely wealthy, popular, and 100% not in jail.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#417

Post by jpadkins »

benterix wrote: post #149
lynx23 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, those civilians who can think for themselves, especially about the consequences of their actions, are clearly in advantage. I am lacking empathy for those who are apparently so hooked up to the here-and-now that they seem to ignore the future. If you sell your body, most societies will punish you. Thats fine, societies have all sorts of norms we all need to learn.

> If you sell your body, most societies will punish you. Why though? It is an interesting issue when you look closer. For an individual, it's more obvious - I wouldn't like to be with a prostitute because of possible hidden diseases and lack of trust - but there is no way of telling how many sexual contacts my new partner had, whether paid for or not. But I wouldn't have any problem working with an ex-pro in the same…

> If you sell your body, most societies will punish you. > Why though?

In stable families and societies, women use sex as control (power) over men. Younger women who sell sex are undermining that power structure. That is why they must be punished.

Another way to look at in economic terms: Female sex is a scarce resource. Female selling transactional sex is commoditizing this resource. In general, people don't like their valuable service getting commoditized.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#418

Post by AmericanChopper »

SunlightEdge wrote: post #363
AmericanChopper wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just arguing over phrasing. It doesn’t matter what you’re trying to do, if you’re making YouTube videos, or music, or paintings, or cakes, or web apps, or cleaning diveways, your ability to succeed boils down to your ability to provide something other people want. That is the objective source of your merit. Perhaps your own idea of success in life is something that revolves exclusively around your own satisfa…

I don't think its black and white. I think sometimes success is a matter of luck. For example, in large organizations there can be a lot of roles generated where there isn't always that much direct pressure and people can be hired through luck (e.g. getting on with the boss, some types of diversity hires, being loyal to a company even if you are not that good etc.). If teams of people make products/reports etc. somet…

You illustrate a perfect example of simply not understanding what people want. Talkers get promoted because talkers have social skills, and companies are social systems, and social skills are required to advance through them. Social skills are probably more desirable than technical skills most of the time. It’s not luck that these people succeed, it’s the fact that they have the qualities that people want.

You can succeed through partially through luck, like if a record executive decides they going to manufacture some massive level of fame for you. But this isn’t a viable long term strategy, only providing what people want is. Over time the variance of luck goes away. The luck outlook relies on the fallacious idea that you only get one opportunity to succeed, but you don’t, you have as long as you’re willing to keep trying. Maybe a failure on one particular day can be explained by luck, but you get to wake up and keep trying every day, and if you have what people want then luck becomes irrelevant and eventually you will succeed. That’s how basically every single successful person you’ve ever heard of has done it.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#419

Post by alt227 »

standardUser wrote: post #406
alt227 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not about gender or sex. This is about any person creating damage for their future selves online. Whether you like it or not, people running businesses and hiring people, or school teachers etc, have opinions and views of their own. These factor into their decisions when they are interacting with you through daily life. If somebody who takes a dim view of promiscuity sees that you have an only fans account, t…

People used to say the same about getting divorced or getting a tattoo or having a child "out of wedlock" (even the terminology sound hopelessly outdated). Maybe think about which side of history you prefer to be on.

These things you mentioned are all still looked on negatively by some people. My grandma curses 'bastards' and children 'out of wedlock'. People still lose out on jobs for having face and neck tattoos, its in the media regularly.

In exactly the same way as having an OF account, its up to the person doing these things to judge the consequences of whether they are happy with some people in the world looking down on them.

Post reply on HN