Under the skin of OnlyFans

>it would just be a different kind of society

We are allowed to rank them by our preferences.

I do not wish males to be treated more expendable than necessary. I wish they would live fulfilling life.

Catholic church was around in Europe as a force since early Middle ages. Wouldn't call it new, unless you have sources to contrary.

I just want to call this out:

> But in January, a hacker seized control of [Tina Bean's] account, blackmailed her for $150 and uploaded streams of IS terror videos.

This is complete bullshit. And continues to worsen.

What's the fix? How do we prevent sockpuppets, impersonation, account seizures? What should we call this category of crime?

Stop using username & password credentials? Issue everyone key fobs? Use the secure enclaves in our phones (iOS, Android)?

--

Repeating myself: One of my coworkers passed and their Facebook profile got pwned. And there was no recourse. I'm still so angry about this I could just spit.

My family has been doing eldercare. The predation is just terrible. It's an industry. And the people targeted have zero ability to protect themselves.

Of course, at some point I'll also become the prey.

--

PS-

FWIW, I'm trying to figure out how to advocate for a fix.

I've made some pathetic attempts to draft a position paper, problem statement.

Next step would be draft model legislation. Then start shopping it around.

My first motivating "use case" is prevent profiles on DoorDash, Yelp etc from being seized by imposters. So do something like require those profile hosting services to link to IRL licenses. Most every trade has some kind of licensing and credentialing authority. Restaurants, nail salons, health care providers, etc.

Ideas?

> Thee wouldn't be a demise, it would just be a different kind of society.

You mean the kind in which we live right now, and where birth rates are well below replacement values?

> The current society we are in where we expect or desire pair bonding for life with an exclusive mate is rather new and unstable.

This is wrong. Stable pair bonds are a feature of nearly all advanced societies. The reasons are game theoretic.

I wonder why this level of scrutiny is not applied to strip clubs and the local Hooters franchise. The same grift and mental issues on Only Fans is present in strip clubs and Hooters too.

Basically there's two sets of victims in these places. First, the girls are only learning one skillset. That is, how to identify marks who have money, and how to get that money in the least amount of time. Once they learn that skillset in their twenties, its very difficult for them to transition to an apprenticeship in any other profession, because the entry level in other jobs will never compare in earning potential to what they make with their sexual grift. Essentially they are mentally damaged forever and its difficult for them to become, for example, a nurse or a developer.

The second set of victims are the guys who are getting fleeced. Perhaps the word victim here is wrong. Maybe the right word is marks. The guys who participate in these transactions are mentally what one used to call "losers" but again I hate labels. Lets just call it what it is.

These are men, who for various reasons, are not able to attract the kind of female attention they want without entering into a monetary transaction with said females. That's very simple, and should be non-controversial to say. Just like we say, someone who goes to a restaurant enters into a monetary transaction for Chicken Vindaloo, because they aren't capable of getting the Vindaloo they want by using non-monetary means (i.e. cooking).

There's no value judgment, but guys who use strip clubs, Hooters, and Only Fans are basically screwing their brains up permanently. They think the kind of attention they get from pretty girls at these venues, is the kind of attention they "deserve". So their expectations in the real world become badly calibrated. Have you ever seen a fifty year old doofus hitting on 20 year olds in a bar, getting rejected hard, and being surprised? That's a habitual strip club client right there.

The other way their brains get screwed up is that these men hang around so many grifters that they think all women are grifters. I'm not going to get into George Bernard Shaws theory that all marriage is a grift, but I think we can all agree that the level of grift in the average marriage is much different and has a different effect on you then the kind of grift that happens in strip clubs and on Only Fans. Basically if you hang around strippers, you'll start to think every woman has a hand in your pocket.

It's very sad. It's kind of like when a kid is abused they start to mistrust all adults. Same thing. These men can become misogynists because their sample data has become so skewed.

Anyway, I'm' kind of sick of how media treats online grift as somehow creating a set of problems that wasn't already there. Go to any small town with poor economic prospects and there's some number of desperate young women who are training in the grift. And there's also some number of men who are the marks. Moving all of this online just makes it so more highly sought after people in both sides of the market have more opportunities. But the problems are the same no matter where the grift is happening.

"Sex worker" is the correct term for both contact and non-contact erotic services and is absolutley the appropriate term to use in this context.

The term was developed by sex workers explicitly for two purposes

1) To move away from the stigma of the term "prostitute"

2) To specifically include sex workers beyond escorts, including porn performers, camgirls, strippers etc