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

251–260 of 615 posts

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#251

Post by tomp »

emptysongglass wrote: post #183
stared wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there are mental health costs that are often not talked about On the contrary, everyone is talking about mental costs, implying that they do not know what they are doing. I know a person who changed her work from being a cashier at a supermarket to a sex worker. Mentally, she benefited a lot. In one job, she felt like an automaton serving people. I other she had personal relationships with her clients. You can gues…

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…

> The men who drive by want to cum as fast as possible with as little damage to their pocketbook as possible

This cannot be true. Anyone can find ample porn online (definitely enough to cum) for free. Therefore it follows that people engaging with OnlyFans and other paid-for porn services must be getting something else out of it - the illusion of an intimate (two-way) relationship, the feeling of dominance (uttering commands that the performers then act out), novelty (a bit far-fetched, there's almost certainly more free porn online than anyone can watch in a lifetime, except maybe extremely niche interests...), or something else...

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#252

Post by hoseja »

sebmellen wrote: post #113
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All valid points. I guess it’s difficult to simultaneously de-stigmatize and urge caution. Instead what happens is we encourage new people to try it, and then some of the people who have tried it share their experiences with the community. That’s how people end up learning about problems with it. Since it is an experimental phase there are more failures (went poorly for some folks). We might say the same thing happen…

And then the cycle of stigmatization begins again… Almost as if there is a purpose to it. Is stigmatization always an objectively bad thing? I suppose it depends on your frame of reference. I don’t think any person should be stigmatized for what they do, but certain activities may well deserve it. I suppose that’s also a recurrent theme in the New Testament. One thing I think ought to be stigmatized more is video gam…

All these are just symptoms, people coping with the current hell-world.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#253

Post by [deleted] »

650REDHAIR wrote: post #20

So our kids are getting older so I've been paying more attention to popular social networks and it's wild how many YouTubers, Twitch'ers, TikTok'ers, Instagram'ers have OF content directly linked from their non-porn bios. I don't like it, but I'm not sure what a good solution is. I mean, people are free to do what they'd like, but it's hard to police screen time 100% of the time and their peer group has a lot more ac…

[deleted]

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#254

Post by Dma54rhs »

leppr wrote: post #171
Dma54rhs wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You should get out of your echo bubble. I have a few friends spending on these types of services (and Twitch which seems to have evolved to host soft versions of OF-type content). They're sociable, principled people, who also have many "regular" relationships. It's not a zero-sum affair.

Looks like you're in a bubble yourself. It's well researched who are those men in that trap spending money. They are lonely and miserable, these so called relationships are toxic and take monetary advantage of them. You can't consent into toxic relationships. Your anecdotes don't matter much in the broad sense.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#255

Post by dannyw »

Dah00n wrote: post #244
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like titles - both on PH and Youtube - tend to get optimized either automatically or by the uploaders themselves. It has overlaps with marketing and SEO, linkbait and optimizing page / article titles to draw in the most views. Youtube also - sometimes - translates video titles, which in some cases is convenient (like Japanese videos). But that's the thing, from a Dutch standpoint you can read English titles ju…

>It has overlaps with marketing and SEO Huh, I wonder if there are tools to do A B testing on sites like Pornhub..

pornhub does this implicitly: the videos you see are the highest engaging winners.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#256

Post by [deleted] »

ryandrake wrote: post #28
650REDHAIR wrote: post #20

So our kids are getting older so I've been paying more attention to popular social networks and it's wild how many YouTubers, Twitch'ers, TikTok'ers, Instagram'ers have OF content directly linked from their non-porn bios. I don't like it, but I'm not sure what a good solution is. I mean, people are free to do what they'd like, but it's hard to police screen time 100% of the time and their peer group has a lot more ac…

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…

[deleted]

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#257

Post by dannyw »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #210
brazzy wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 long run. This is something that's really been bugging me when looking at Reddit's porn subs. There has been a really noticeable change in the last 2 years. Back then, a majority of the posters seemed to actually be amateurs getting their kic…

Personally addressing the reader makes them engage more, tempts them into engaging with the author in comments or, if they're thirsty, DMs. It's like youtube videos where a repeated pattern is direct questions to answer in the comments, invitations to share your thoughts, or even games like including "hidden words" in the video. There's not even a reward or anything for finding it, but it's apparently enough for some…

Is this wrong at all? I like YouTube, particularly creators like Gamers Nexus/ Hardware Unboxed for example, and like it when they engage in discussions on reddit or discord.

The internet connects people, sometimes 1:1, sometimes 1:N.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#258

Post by 12ian34 »

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.

> You can't expect customers to be courteous and professional with you if the product is sex

Whatever the product, even if there is no product, one should expect others to be courteous and professional and sex "workers" (I do believe it's real work, yes) deserve to expect this just as much as others - it's just a shame that so many men (not always, but generally) let them down so much.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#259

Post by dannyw »

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…

Before getting super vocal, please consider that HN is a global community and hence your critique might be very irrelevant to GP or other readers.

Sex work is very different in Australia for example, where it is regulated, with regular testing, mandated security at venues, and no risk of criminalisation. Full access to banking. And while assaults are always a risk, there are "camgirls" who have been doxxed and raped too.

This is why I think people should stop being outraged by words especially in mass media. Context is key, and context is local.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#260

Post by dabbledash »

dannyw wrote: post #249
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…

Sexualisation is a reflection of society. Ask women what they experience if they show up to work without makeup. In my view, onlyfans is a net positive for society. Would you rather like sex trafficking? Because face it, humans have hormones, and our social norms encourage men to go for status and women for appearance. These facts create the atmosphere for sex work.

“Ask women what they experience if they show up to work without makeup.”

My experience of not wearing makeup in lots of places, over many years: Nothing happens. It’s fine.

Post reply on HN