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

301–310 of 615 posts

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#301

Post by acatton »

stared wrote: post #154

I was surprised why OnlyFans is so popular. All in all, there is no shortage of free erotic materials online ( https://observablehq.com/@stared/tree-of-reddit-sex-life for a small subset). I got an insight from "The Surprising Psychology Of OnlyFans Simps by Charisma on Command" ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auG2E53dFas ) that subscribers buy attention rather than sex .

> subscribers buy attention rather than sex.

That's how the Minitel[1] got popular in France. They had these chat services where one paid per minute to chat with "women in your area" (It was mostly male operators handling multiple conversation simultaneously[2])

These services have always existed, and were always in demand, the only difference is technology and business models.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minitel (basically the french version of the internet, ahead of its time)

[2] In French: https://www.nouvelobs.com/rue89/rue89-rue69/20120629.RUE0957... "My name is Jean-Marc and I was 'female moderator' of erotic Minitel"

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#302

Post by kreft »

vmception wrote: post #81
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…

On the other hand, I have found it pleasant how reliably non-offensive it is to ask almost any attractive* woman about their subscription content now. It is mostly freemium or they are willing to have an objective conversation about how they’ve been thinking about it. I don’t really think it is different from a parenting perspective. Many of the women** appreciate the approach about their content because the intentio…

It's hard to make the argument for the harmlessness of porn when the sight of an attractive woman triggers the thought "I need to ask about their subscription content".

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#303

Post by 7sidedmarble »

labster wrote: post #30
chii wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> onlyfans is especially predatory if this is what you call predatory, then why isn't sports stars and film/music celebrity culture not predatory in the same way? I don't see the difference. I say let people do what they want, as long as they understand what they're doing and is informed of the (potential) consequences.

Sports is predatory, see the NCAA monopoly. Music was well known in the last century for predatory contracts. People like Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey from the film industry are often called predators, and the casting couch is legendary. Celebrity culture is highly predatory with obsessive fans and stalker paparazzi. You’re right, no real difference.

Almost like we live within a certain economic system engineered to alienate us from our own sense of self that can convince people to squeeze every last drop of their own personal value out for the hope of not having to continue to scrape by.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#304

Post by cinntaile »

brazzy wrote: post #285
dannyw wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It's wrong when it deliberately creates a promise of closeness that is completely illusionary. A Youtuber asking for comments they may or may not have the time to read is one thing, a camgirl writing 200 subscribers "Haven't seen you in a while, touching myself now imagining your dick inside me" is a very different thing.

I would argue that the same thing happens on Twitch, a completely fake "emotional" bond with your subscribers is created by live interacting with them. You also have whales tipping thousands of dollars.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#305

Post by teekert »

polote wrote: post #262
teekert wrote: post #234

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 hacki…

> but I wonder if it is just "guessed" a simple password and failure to set mfa. She say, they kept stealing her password, so it was probably that the hacker had access to her email then he was able to keep changing the OF password

Yeah, if she would have had a nerd in her life she/he would have realized this and reset the email, applied 2fa, make sure the Phone is up to date, check for malicious apps etc (maybe reset phone and reinstall laptop OS even). The fact the password stealing happened more than once should really set of a lot of alarm bells. Indeed, very much focused on her email account.

Again, not saying this was her mistake, I know many people that would react this way. I hope they call me when it happens.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#306

Post by Kiro »

dannyw wrote: post #240
Kiro wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

No, I don't think it's a net negative. I do however think objectification of women is since it amplifies one of the biggest issues of society for very little gain. The small negative impact Call of Duty has (if any) is minuscule in comparison.

> If you are a parent, teach your children to build respectful, healthy relationships.

If you actually think it's that easy you're minimizing the fight for equality and rights for all women.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#307

Post by zahrc »

Khaine wrote: post #296

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 th…

> 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.

IF I’d be that desperate I’d rather stick to a prostitute. Regular uploads aren’t even guaranteed. You could be paying something where you don’t even know the value of.

I hate this world of, everything needs to be a subscription…

On another note, I’m also glad that I’m in a healthy and happy relationship in my late 20’s because tinder in my area is 90% Instagram and OnlyFans ads.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#308

Post by hackinthebochs »

stared wrote: post #154

I was surprised why OnlyFans is so popular. All in all, there is no shortage of free erotic materials online ( https://observablehq.com/@stared/tree-of-reddit-sex-life for a small subset). I got an insight from "The Surprising Psychology Of OnlyFans Simps by Charisma on Command" ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auG2E53dFas ) that subscribers buy attention rather than sex .

I'm always surprised at how surprised people are that there is a market for porn. Almost no one would not be satisfied with a generic porn channel that showed random content of random ages, random body types, random genders, etc. Everyone has some criteria when it comes to porn they consume. Some people just have more specific criteria than others.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#309

Post by bjoli »

Fnoord wrote: post #281

> For creators who do receive abuse, the site allows them to mute or block that fan. However, the platform automatically gives anyone who has been blocked - regardless of the reason - a refund of their active subscription. > Many creators who spoke to the BBC felt this policy was misused by fans and some said it can incentivise them to be rude or provocative, as their monthly subscriptions come to a close. Others add…

How is it in the US? "Olaga hot" ("unlawful threat") is a crime in Sweden with a maximum punishment of 4 years in prison. 1 year maximum for the lower grade. 4 for the higher one. Time served is usually half that

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#310

Post by Xylakant »

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.

You seem to misunderstand my point, despite me spelling it out. I don’t consider anecdotes dangerous. I consider basing policy discussions/decisions on anecdotes dangerous, because anecdotes cannot capture sufficient data. What policy should we derive from my anecdote about my friend who was deliberately targeted by the person they were caring for? Ban nurse work because it’s unhealthy? Ensure sufficient oversight so that clients get filtered? Ensure mediation for volunteers in that space? It’s impossible to derive a reasonable policy in the individual level.
Post reply on HN