A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong • Hacker News Board

Re: A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong

#441

Post by throwaway210821 » Sun, Aug 22, 2021, 1:01 AM UTC

lishzen wrote: post #335

rendall wrote: post #94

I've never heard a good argument against prostitution. The arguments that I hear are against trafficking, rape, child molestation; which are all non-sequiturs: true and valid statements that do not support the argument itself. Can anyone here argue against prostitution per se? I'll listen.

Yours is a short question to make, but it requires a very long answer, not fit for a comment box. The negative consequences of prostitution are deeply personal because the effects of sex on the participants go deeper and last longer than the effects of the act of copulation. If you want a good argument against prostitution one route could be to understand the link between sexual expression and: intimacy, self esteem,…

You are probably right, but what is the alternative? banning prostitution is to me a very bad idea, it won't end it, it will just force the women to work illegally without the protections of the state.

I've been a customer of several sex workers in many countries and most of them are actually OK with their job and lifestyle (I've asked several). In many places it's the best/only opportunity they have to earn good money and be independent. They find it better to sell their bodies for 1 hour tops with rules and regulations to several men than to have to marry and stay with one man that hits them and makes their life miserable

Another thing I've found by experience is that most women see prostitution as a temporal thing to make some money and then quit. I'd love to see research on the topic but from my experience it's a job that they do for months, maybe 1 year at maximum, but do enough money to quit and do something else.

I think overall legal prostitution is way better than black market prostitution. No-prostitution just won't ever happen no matter what, isn't it the oldest of jobs?

Re: A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong

#442

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Aug 22, 2021, 4:20 AM UTC

_bfhp wrote: post #436

neolog wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The four women I quoted are pointing out that workers prefer to have safer venues for doing business, more community connections, and better legal support for their business. To avoid cases of exploitation, improving social welfare is a good response. Sex work by itself is neither liberating nor exploitative, just as any other domain of work isn't. That determination applies to the circumstance of the work, not the d…

In which other industry is a massive subset of workers r-ped each day? There were children working in Industrial Revolution factories that ended up perfectly healthy. You and I recognize the practice as immoral (I assume?) because the exceptions don't matter

[deleted]

Re: A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong

#443

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Aug 22, 2021, 4:29 AM UTC

_bfhp wrote: post #436

neolog wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The four women I quoted are pointing out that workers prefer to have safer venues for doing business, more community connections, and better legal support for their business. To avoid cases of exploitation, improving social welfare is a good response. Sex work by itself is neither liberating nor exploitative, just as any other domain of work isn't. That determination applies to the circumstance of the work, not the d…

In which other industry is a massive subset of workers r-ped each day? There were children working in Industrial Revolution factories that ended up perfectly healthy. You and I recognize the practice as immoral (I assume?) because the exceptions don't matter

[deleted]

Re: A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong

#444

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Aug 22, 2021, 4:54 AM UTC

_bfhp wrote: post #436

neolog wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The four women I quoted are pointing out that workers prefer to have safer venues for doing business, more community connections, and better legal support for their business. To avoid cases of exploitation, improving social welfare is a good response. Sex work by itself is neither liberating nor exploitative, just as any other domain of work isn't. That determination applies to the circumstance of the work, not the d…

In which other industry is a massive subset of workers r-ped each day? There were children working in Industrial Revolution factories that ended up perfectly healthy. You and I recognize the practice as immoral (I assume?) because the exceptions don't matter

[deleted]

Re: A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong

#445

Post by neolog » Sun, Aug 22, 2021, 7:54 AM UTC

_bfhp wrote: post #436

neolog wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The four women I quoted are pointing out that workers prefer to have safer venues for doing business, more community connections, and better legal support for their business. To avoid cases of exploitation, improving social welfare is a good response. Sex work by itself is neither liberating nor exploitative, just as any other domain of work isn't. That determination applies to the circumstance of the work, not the d…

In which other industry is a massive subset of workers r-ped each day? There were children working in Industrial Revolution factories that ended up perfectly healthy. You and I recognize the practice as immoral (I assume?) because the exceptions don't matter

Forced labor and violent abuse are common in many industries eg [1][2]. That said, abuse in the sex industry is more widespread and horrible than I realized. Knowing what I know now I would've responded differently.

[1] https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/jessicagarrison/the-new...

[2] https://www.ilo.org/global/topics/forced-labour/policy-areas...

Re: A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong

#446

Post by arp242 » Sun, Aug 22, 2021, 10:03 AM UTC

bjourne wrote: post #316

arp242 wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is nothing wrong with the article (from memory, I read it some time ago), the problem is going from "there is a small minority of users who abuse user-generated content platforms" to "zomg, this platform is a horrible and encouraging all sorts of illegal things!" One does not follow from the other. The problem with the article isn't that it exposed a problem, that part was excellent journalism, the problem is a…

You don't seem to be talking about the article that was linked to in the comment you replied to.

The entire first paragraph was, and the rest is indeed about the larger issues at play.

Re: A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong

#447

Post by arp242 » Sun, Aug 22, 2021, 10:11 AM UTC

55555 wrote: post #314

twic wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why not fix the code that suggests rape videos? Deciding what is and isn't rape is an AI-hard problem.

Pornhub literally hasn't even let you search "rape" in years. Go ahead and search it. 0 results. This precedes the now infamous editorial. Same with "forced" and "brutal".

Consensual non-consensual (CNC) and even "rapekink" is a thing. There is nothing wrong with videos having "rape", "forced", or "brutal" in it as long as everyone performing is doing so out of their own free will.

This is a bit akin to saying that a film like reservoir dogs encourages theft, torture, and murder.

You may not like it personally, and that's perfectly reasonable, but a lot of people – men and women alike – do.

Re: A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong

#448

Post by totony » Sun, Aug 22, 2021, 3:10 PM UTC

ABCLAW wrote: post #377

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also I think you may have to look and see how much journalists make. To be so entrenched in a mass conspiracy that takes down whole networks of industry, I’d negotiate a better salary then the equivalent of $20/hour. This is like arguing that hooligans engaged in vandalism are virtuous because they're not millionaires. You're failing to distinguish between journalists publishing a balanced truthful article in which…

>"nice business you've got there, shame if someone were to publish a hit piece in a major media outlet." I might be misreading this, but are you implying that a subset of journalists perform investigative journalism to engage in blackmail rather than to follow-up on a lead or hunch? I think it's interesting that people believe that this is the ambit of journalists rather than short selling investor relations groups w…

Being a journalist does not absolve you from wrongdoings. Wasn't the journalist who did the hit piece related to some religious anti-porn org?

Re: A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong

#449

Post by alexashka » Sun, Aug 22, 2021, 5:23 PM UTC

rendall wrote: post #94

I've never heard a good argument against prostitution. The arguments that I hear are against trafficking, rape, child molestation; which are all non-sequiturs: true and valid statements that do not support the argument itself. Can anyone here argue against prostitution per se? I'll listen.

Why should anyone argue for/against it?

It's like being grossly obese - it speaks for itself.

Now some people can pretend they're happily obese - they're not fooling anyone but other fools.

Whether or not being a fool should be illegal is a different matter. My take on it is if it's not hurting anyone else - go for it, just don't expect medical treatment for self destructive behaviour afterwards - we have an over-abundance of fools on this planet as of late.

Re: A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong

#450

Post by AnthonyMouse » Sun, Aug 22, 2021, 10:02 PM UTC

ABCLAW wrote: post #377

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also I think you may have to look and see how much journalists make. To be so entrenched in a mass conspiracy that takes down whole networks of industry, I’d negotiate a better salary then the equivalent of $20/hour. This is like arguing that hooligans engaged in vandalism are virtuous because they're not millionaires. You're failing to distinguish between journalists publishing a balanced truthful article in which…

>"nice business you've got there, shame if someone were to publish a hit piece in a major media outlet." I might be misreading this, but are you implying that a subset of journalists perform investigative journalism to engage in blackmail rather than to follow-up on a lead or hunch? I think it's interesting that people believe that this is the ambit of journalists rather than short selling investor relations groups w…

> I might be misreading this, but are you implying that a subset of journalists perform investigative journalism to engage in blackmail rather than to follow-up on a lead or hunch?

It's not blackmail for money, it's blackmail for capitulation.

Suppose you have a dishonest journalist who thinks car companies should submit the location history of all their customers' vehicles to the FBI without a warrant.

You can't successfully advocate for that as government policy because it would violate the Fourth Amendment and anyway the public isn't likely to want that.

You can't use honest reporting to convince customers in the market to not buy a Ford just because Ford isn't doing that, because customers don't want to buy a car that constantly reports their location to the authorities without their consent.

But if you call up Ford and ask them some leading questions implying that you're going to publish a hit piece on them if they don't change their policy, now you're blackmailing them to change their policy. The point of the story isn't to inform the public of the company doing something bad, it's to coerce the company to change their policy under threat of slanted negative media coverage.