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

The Internet Is for Porn

themargins.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 460 posts

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#231

Post by tomc1985 »

bonoboTP wrote: post #108

"Everything in life is about sex, except sex. Sex is about power." I think the debate is not really about porn, but people's sense of justice, cheating, deserving things or not etc. Some feel like porn gives unearned satisfaction to young men, a virtual substitute they don't have to work for. The bitter other side will say, no shit, I won't slave away to get screwed over, it's much more straightforward business to co…

> That it hollows out the sanctity of this intimate and symbolic act.

See that's the problem. We as a society need to stop putting sex on a pedestal. It's just sex. Pleasure is pleasure, why would anyone not want to be pleasured?

And why is pleasure something that has to be earned? It is very simple to give and receive pleasure, why complicate that?

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#232

Post by ogre_codes »

kodah wrote: post #29

Porn always reminds me of other classical debates that have no end like guns and abortion. The camps of folks in the middle who are cognitively capable of making a difference can't because the outsized voices on either side of them are screaming for either total freedom or total shutdown. They actively fear monger people out of action so no real progress is made. It prevents the best coders and business people from w…

> My basis for that is that virtually anything sex related, apart from toys, cannot be purchased with credit or debit cards.

Hmm, the 3 adult shops I pass on the way into work beg to differ. You can buy anything from lingerie, to lube (with CBD Oil!), videos, handcuffs, ball gags... You can get any of this stuff online too.

The only place where you might struggle to use Visa cards for sex is on sites that have been busted with illegal content.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#234

Post by SyzygistSix »

Melting_Harps wrote: post #48
what2build wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can sell our bodies to be destroyed in coal mines, sitting at desks, smash them up building homes, abusing them in sports, catch a Covid-19 bug... Puritan economics seem perfectly accepting of destroying ourselves. Willingly sell self for pleasure though? Psh Only if the pleasure comes from that new gadget or next airfare (which is destroying the environment but so it is)

> Willingly sell self for pleasure though? Psh Having been in a sector of fintech that many sex workers used, I can say with confidence that the majority of the women within were single moms who simply couldn't or didn't have access to the social net to feed their children and aren't doing it because they want to. It was entirely eye-opening to see how sad it is when you're talking with a young women trying to sell t…

>Having been in a sector of fintech that many sex workers used, I can say with confidence that the majority of the women within were single moms who simply couldn't or didn't have access to the social net to feed their children and aren't doing it because they want to.

Sounds like the majority of jobs. Although I agree that the lack of social services in the US has reached ridiculous levels.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#235

Post by ALittleLight »

Fargren wrote: post #187
computerphage wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know enough to decide with certainty if the post in question is right, but it definitely seems earnest. I believe the poster sincerely holds those beliefs.

People seriously believe being advertised at is "just as much a negative" as the stigma from being a porn actress? I have no appreciation for the advertising industry, but this is hard for me to believe.

I don't know about "just as much". Negatives like these are hard to quantify and therefore hard to compare. What the men are paying for on OnlyFans is a pseudo-connection or a fake relationship. This strikes me as being emotionally, sexually, or romantically manipulative or exploitative.

Of course the men choose to contribute but the incentive structure is for the women to foster a sense of intimacy or connection so they can exploit it for cash. It's a voluntary association, but it doesn't seem like a morally neutral or harmless association to me.

This is not to say that the harm men face from exploitation is greater than the harm that women face - or that women don't also face this phenomenon, but just that it is also a harmful byproduct of the service.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#236

Post by salmon30salmon »

Anon1096 wrote: post #216
lumberjack wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the record no real feminist would publish this horseshit. It is one thing to advocate for better conditions for sex workers. It is another thing entirely to pimp young girls on the internet, and to even equate the two while pretending to be a feminist is just despicable.

How is making an OnlyFans account, where the content creator is completely in control of their actions, in any way comparable to pimping? There isn't even a "pimp" in this scenario. The women have 100% agency in when, how, and what to post. To me that does seem pretty liberating.

You are assuming that the creator of the OnlyFans site is not under duress in any way. You are also assuming that the creator and maintainer of the site is the same person who is featured on the site. Exploitation of women (and men) can happen even in the most seemingly egalitarian of communities.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#237

Post by SyzygistSix »

_huayra_ wrote: post #223
sillysaurusx wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought a lot about your comment. This is what bugs me: That said, social tolerance should not devolve into some sort of forced social acceptance for the "liberation" of sex work. Just as any woman should be free to engage in sex work, I should be free to judge her for it What exactly are you judging her for? For being comfortable with her body?

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. Just as a sex worker can choose to engage in their activities because they are of the opinion that it is okay, one can certainly choose to have a negative opinion of their choice. As long as those opinions don't turn into adverse action (e.g. banning one's rights to engage in sex work) I don't see what the consequences of having opinions is. Personally, I choose to avoid pe…

>Everyone is entitled to their own opinions.

Of course. It's practically axiomatic. Which is why it is strange you brought up one particular opinion.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#238

Post by wmf »

Why did it take this long? Why would no one else have the courage to address sex work?

OnlyFans reminds me of Zivity from 2008 which was VC-funded and founded by a woman but it didn't take off and has now been forgotten. There are probably lessons to be learned from that history but first you'd have to know that history exists.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#239

Post by SyzygistSix »

burnthrow wrote: post #220
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The overwhelming majority of us are "forced" to sell something for a living. Why make such a distinction between selling body pics versus manual labor?

My code's not too shabby, but I don't think anybody's bust a nut to it.

That's the puritanical aspect. Many things are deemed to be perfectly fine, as long as no one is orgasming to it.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#240

Post by [deleted] »

rubicon33 wrote: post #219
burntoutfire wrote: post #43

> [About SV] An observer might note that all of these companies are dominated by men, in an industry dominated by men, tightly interwoven with a venture capital industry that is super-dominated by men. So it’s curious why none of these men have shown any interest in addressing the massive and lucrative sex work industry that overwhelmingly serves, well, men; until you consider who pays the real costs of that industry…

Welcome to 2020 where identity politics is the name of the game. It seems everything these days can be explained based on your race/gender and yet this is supposedly the most "woke" time ever. Cue the downvotes.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN