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

Under the skin of OnlyFans

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 615 posts

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#231

Post by brazzy »

blippage wrote: post #198
ayngg wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think in general there are some pretty big costs that aren't fully understood to doing sex work, even outside of the social stigma of being found out by your friends and family, there are mental health costs that are often not talked about. A lot of sex workers overtly reinforce social behaviors towards women (sexualization and objectification among other things) in order to appeal to men, which hurts them in the l…

> I feel like these dangerous aspects of sex work are often ignored in the current zeitgeist of de-stigmatizing, I agree entirely. I heard of one young lady who started an OnlyFans, apparently did quite well, but decided to stop it because of the psychic damage. I'm going to be heavily downvoted for this, but I'm going to say it anyway ... We need to stop all the bullshit about how it empowers women. Certain sections…

You're making the implicit assumption that sex work is always inherently exploitative.

That is a common assumption shared both by social conservatives who think any sex outside marriage is wrong anyway, and certain feminist circles who seem to have a problem with seeing male sexuality as anything but a threat.

But I don't think that assumption is correct. Sure, sex work can be exploitative, and it often is. But it doesn't have to be. Just like the hospitality industry has an endemic problem with workers being exploited financially and tolerating verbally abusive behaviour from customers - yet nobody suggests restaurants in general are morally wrong and should be discouraged.

It is possible to do sex work in a non-exploitative way that maintains respect and boundaries between sex worker and client.

The problem is that you can increase short term profits by blurring boundaries, and the network effects of online platforms probaby magnify that.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#232

Post by brabel »

Dma54rhs wrote: post #109
eh9 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except it’s nothing like selling crack and the platform isn’t doing enough to keep performers safe.

How is not taking monetary advantage of lonely men who most likely never have normal human relationships not immoral? People spending money on these things are not your average Joe's. The whole idea is morally corrupt and onlyfans and the like are doing it on scale now.

If those men (and women, I am sure) didn't have porn and onlyfans, they might not have anything at all to replace those. I don't think that's immoral. Both parties benefit, even if one benefits more than the other.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#233

Post by Bayart »

KaiserPro wrote: post #230
Bayart wrote: post #190

Who knew a site which thrives on abolishing all personal boundaries in digital prostitution would have problems. You can't expect customers to be courteous and professional with you if the product is sex, all the more so if you're leveraging the illusion of a social relationship. It's a one or the other proposition. There's no in-between, there's no picking both. The entire thing is schizophrenic.

I'm not quite understanding your assertion here. are you saying that because people are selling pictures/videos of them selves doing sexy things, we should expect and accept that people are violent to them? I mean, chat shows are pretty much the same thing, an illusion of a social relationship, but we don't accept stalkers on those platforms? why does nakedness change that?

>we should expect and accept that people are violent to them?

Accept no, expect absolutely. Which is why boundaries and control mechanisms are needed, the removal of which is the entire premise of OnlyFans.

>I mean, chat shows are pretty much the same thing, an illusion of a social relationship, but we don't accept stalkers on those platforms?

Are you referring to Twitch ? That's not the same thing, at all. Sex isn't a minor variable. It re-frames the entire problem in a context where people lose the ability to appropriately parse and manage their para-social relationships. Furthermore Twitch itself (other platforms aren't really worth mentioning) doesn't encourage entertainer-user relationship beyond the only tools it provides : the chat box and the stream. Everything else is external, and that includes OnlyFans !

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#234

Post by teekert »

They use the word "hacked", but I wonder if it is just "guessed" a simple password and failure to set mfa.

Don't get me wrong, I despise the people that even try to guess the password, but calling it "hacking" is a missed opportunity to inform people about the dangers of simple passwords and single factor authentication.

Again, not saying it wasn't "hacking" in this case. Or maybe I have the wrong definition of hacking (I'd even prefer they called it black hat hacking if it were real "hacking" but ah well).

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#235

Post by HPsquared »

thinkingemote wrote: post #141
ryandrake wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know--as I get older, and see things like this, I can't help but think maybe I'm just turning into an out-of-touch old fart. Maybe norms are simply changing and the next generations are building a better world free of all these stupid taboos and hangups. My ol' grandpa looked at my generation and just didn't understand how we were OK with things like interracial marriage, same sex relationships, drug legaliza…

With this logic the following generations will also be perplexed at a changing world that has lost all barriers and controls. Every generation will be forever perplexed as every year the world changes. continuously. The old ways will continuously be outdated. It's literally limitless as limits are removed. What type of things do you think our kids will be puzzled about in the future? Where is the world headed? For ma…

Things can reverse and move in cycles, society doesn't always move in a progressive direction.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strauss%E2%80%93Howe_generat...

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#236

Post by newsclues »

Xylakant wrote: post #229
emptysongglass wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My wife who is a sex worker is in therapy provided by her camsite because the work is so toxic. She was as pro-sex-work as you can be when she first started five years ago. It's majority trauma and I have to hear the stories every day. The men who drive by want to cum as fast as possible with as little damage to their pocketbook as possible. So they drive in, maybe critique her appearance, say, "tits" or "ass" (usual…

I’m sorry for your wife. However, I think it’s dangerous to shape the conversation about sex work solely around such cases. A person from my old flat share was a nurse on a terminal cancer ward for mostly children. > 90% of the patients died. They burned out within two years on the job. My aunt had to quit her job as hospital nurse because it physically ruined her body. She’s still suffering from that, decades later.…

Two anecdote from different sides of the spectrum and you feel the one you disagree with is dangerous.

Just because normal jobs suck, doesn’t mean sex work is good.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#237

Post by xenocratus »

AKSucks wrote: post #226
ayngg wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think in general there are some pretty big costs that aren't fully understood to doing sex work, even outside of the social stigma of being found out by your friends and family, there are mental health costs that are often not talked about. A lot of sex workers overtly reinforce social behaviors towards women (sexualization and objectification among other things) in order to appeal to men, which hurts them in the l…

Can we please not use the term "sex worker" for people who do not face the vast majority of risks (health/physical, financial, legal-of-the-criminal-sort, and emotional) that someone who actually engages in sex with other people for money does? You (generally speaking) cannot get infected with STIs, pregnant, assaulted, raped, drugged, stabbed, murdered, convicted, jailed - for being a camgirl. You (generally speakin…

This is part of the concept creep saga: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10463283.2020.1...

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#238

Post by uulbiy »

simonebrunozzi wrote: post #101
throwmeawaydddy wrote: post #33

Fire up the throwaway! Not 100% related to the article, but directly related. I worked as developer for a product in the same niche ("democratizing adult content"). I spent almost 2 years working on the frontend, devops, and building out the analytics engine (all pre-covid). Anyway, on to the comment at hand. We had a small number of users compared to OnlyFans (when I left, there were about 20K active content creator…

> there were about 20K active content creators). The average monthly payment was $5000 20k times $5,000 = $100M/month. Still quite impressive.

I think this is not correct. The 20K were the content creators and the payments were from the their subscribers which should be a lot more. Even more impressive!

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#239

Post by tut-urut-utut »

toyg wrote: post #132
tinco wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The titles on sites like pornhub are a lot worse. Sometimes I feel like they're automatically generated or something, with weird sexual fantasies that aren't even remotely in the video. It's become a bit of a meme, and it certainly has always been present but for example the incest stuff, it's just disturbing to me to the point where I greatly prefer browsing on Reddit just because the titles are more tame. Another c…

>the titles sound so much more vulgar in Dutch than they do in English to me. It's the other way around: you're less emotionally connected to your second language. You're not phased by the most scurrilous elements of English, because of a combination of factors (like the way your brain processes a second language, and the fact that you did not grow up in a native English culture). Whereas you have a primary connectio…

This is so much true. It's almost like swearing in English is not swearing at all, even in semi-formal context. You can tell the worst swear in English you can think of, and it just sounds harmless compared to swearing in local language.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#240

Post by dannyw »

Kiro wrote: post #110
SilverRed wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you considered the alternative that this is not an evil which you are unable to control but just another way of living / thinking of sexual content? There is nothing inherently evil about this stuff so why is it terrible that it is becoming more accepted/common? If in 30 years we live in a society where people post nudes like they do facebook posts, is there anything wrong about this? Could you describe the harm…

It's debatable and not as clear cut. Many believe that a "liberation" of sexual content manifests the objectification of women and therefore is a net negative to society and the progress toward equality.

Do you think Call of Duty manifests the acceptance of violence and is a net negative to society?

There's nothing that special about sex work. If you are a parent, teach your children to build respectful, healthy relationships.

Post reply on HN