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

291–300 of 615 posts

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#291

Post by 12ian34 »

strogonoff wrote: post #144
jedberg wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can easily launder money through any two sided market. OF is no different in that regard.

In normal two-sided markets goods or services are being exchanged, making it feasible to check whether the price paid reflects reality in any way. On the other hand, it is very difficult to prove that someone is faking being a fan, so laundering can be as easy as giving a friend N dollars of suspect cash or cryptocurrency and having them pay you N minus the hassle fee through Twitch/OnlyFans/etc. from their credit ca…

You could probably use web analytics to reasonably estimate engagement and calculate engagement per spend, comparing that between users.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#292

Post by throwaway0a5e »

newsclues wrote: post #282
Xylakant wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel it’s dangerous shaping conversations around individual anecdotes. I can tell you multiple positive anecdotes from the nursing side as well. Another friend of mine did long-term individual care for a disabled person and they got along extremely well, even traveling and such. That friend considered that his dream job. My father’s current partner volunteers at a hospice. She considers that an important part of he…

You seemed to focus only only positive anecdotes, and then claim the negative ones are dangerous. Anyone can cherry pick data and present a few cases to support their world view.

The point was that most people know that medical care at the RN and below levels is a shitshow of over-worked employees and understaffed facilities but if you pick anecdotes you can make it look like it's all unicorns and rainbows.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#293

Post by leppr »

Dma54rhs wrote: post #254
leppr wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> It's well researched who are those men

Source needed. A quick Google search turned up nothing.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#294

Post by belorn »

watwut wrote: post #267
belorn wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every thing that is used by the lower class to escape reality get stigmatized, and the more effective it is the more problematic society view it. The decline in alcohol addictions is often attributed to gaming, particularly among men. I also personally prefer people who are addicted to games over those addicted to alcohol, and long term it is much safer for everyone involved.

> The decline in alcohol addictions is often attributed to gaming, particularly among men. I have never seen this. Like, this is literally first time I see this attribution being made.

Interesting, I have seen the link being discussed several times on national news, in particular to the decrease in teenage drinking. Some people also link this with lower amount of sex. There is also studies showing that heavy investment in gaming reduces the risk of excessive alcohol use and alcohol-related harm.

While I have not seen a study on it, I would expect to see a correlation between the need to escape reality and the use of tools that allow escaping. With this follow also a link with social status and class. It is why alcohol use traditionally was associated with the lower classes, and laws directed at consumption of alcohol was basically laws direct at the lower classes.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#295

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

ayngg wrote: post #74
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…

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 believe you, but honestly I think most jobs in modern society come with metal health costs, especially those in the "unskilled labor" category. Maybe sex work is worse, but maybe it isn't, at least for a certain kind of person.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#296

Post by Khaine »

I’m not anti-sex or anti-sex work, but I think onlyfans is evil. They have a business model, that is perfected to extract as much money from whales as possible. Performers appear to have ‘relationships’ with their subscribers, encourage them to tip, buy ‘customs’, and ‘engage’ with them.

These sad lonely sexless men spend all their money on this shit. It consumes them, until they are out of money, then it destroys them. It warps their expectations of relationships further impacting their datability, driving them even more towards onlyfans.

Now, this is only a minority of their users, but makes a large proportion of their revenue. For healthy people, only fans can be great.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#297

Post by bongoman37 »

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.

Its not all men. I know women who also spend on these platforms just because they like to support certain creators. They have other normal relationships too.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#299

Post by K0balt »

brazzy wrote: post #231
blippage wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 do…

The problem with sexwork is that it is based on the persistent and dangerous illusion that there are NO boundaries, either emotionally or physically, between the client and the customer. In many cases, the boundary is enforced by physics (time-space) but often it is not.

The appeal of sexwork products is that they can be used to simulate a needful human interaction, one that implies the highest degree of intimacy even when intimacy is explicitly not present.

The necessary deception inherent in the consumption of sexwork products is normally voluntarily performed by the consumer of the product, but even so, failure to successfully self deceive shifts the onus of deception onto the performer, either with or without their knowledge.

The complex and inherently (usually consensually) deceptive nature of sexwork makes it a minefield of misadventure and unintended consequences. Add some unstable people in there, and you have all of the necessary elements for extreme negative outcomes.

I think there is an argument to be made that for the 30 percent of the population on the backside of the bell curve of intelligence, emotional agency, or socialization there is a high probability of an inherently exploitative interaction with most live sexwork.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#300

Post by random_kris »

dabbledash wrote: post #260
dannyw wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Sure you might not notice it. But 80% of others notice and comment on it.

They don't expirence anything directly, but through time they get better treatment versus their non makeup wearing counterparts.

Source? My office expirence, also my gf's master thesis was on how apperence affects office atmosphere.. (something in this line)

Post reply on HN