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

491–500 of 615 posts

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#491

Post by mullen »

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…

The woman should have called the police and filed a police report. Yes, the police are not going to do much, but you got the paperwork going. Then she could submit that to OnlyFans and inform them a crime is being committed on their platform. That puts everything on them. Unfortunately, expecting OF to take care of the issue is really naive.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#492

Post by throwawaay_3424 »

throwawayof1234 wrote: post #416

Made a throwaway to post this. For various reasons I happen to know personally many (>10) women who've created an OnlyFans or otherwise participate in online sex work. I know these people well enough that we discuss things like our mental health state / conditions. One commonality that I have found is that many of the women who start an OF are already suffering from a mental health condition that has as a symptom hyp…

not my problem

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#493

Post by standardUser »

cunthorpe wrote: post #10

I think that people need to understand that once they put themselves out there, especially in sex-fueled environments, they’re adding risk to their lives. They put their sex on full display and think “yeah this is totally fine” while it obviously carries some huge societal weight. I’m not justifying their actions, but also don’t be surprised when they happen. The world isn’t perfect yet. I don’t care much about OF, b…

I know a good number of people in their 30's and 40's that do various types of sex work and I don't think they are deluding themselves about the risks.

But it's easy to forget that most people engaging in this type of work are in their late teens and 20's and though I hate to stereotype, we know that a lot of people in those age ranges are less skilled at assessing risk and thinking longer term.

The solution is probably education and removing stigma.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#495

Post by Dracophoenix »

dfxm12 wrote: post #451
jszymborski wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I'm totally honest, I never thought of it this way, but humour me this: if OF and the like are considered distributors in the traditional sense of the entertainment world, would they typically be responsible for engaging in legal disputes over unauthorized distribution? My feeble understanding of the law is that it would be more appropriate for copyright holders to sue in instances of illegal distribution. I under…

If a company gets revenue from exclusive content, they should do whatever it takes to make sure that content is exclusive. If a company gets revenue from content creators, they should do what it takes to attract and retain content creators. Whether or not the company owns the copyright in this case, based on these premises, whether that the company has the right to do it themselves, or on behalf of their content crea…

If we're discussing this from a "best interest" standpoint, then the studio is no longer obtaining revenue if it's being asked to delete all the content of a specific person on its own sites and thus any obligations of keeping content out of reach from other service providers cease. It's not in the studio's best interests to spend money litigating or issuing DMCA notices on behalf of a former associate.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#496

Post by walterbell »

flyinglizard wrote: post #393
roenxi wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably bad for the mental health of the men too. As the thread ancestor noted - sometimes "'fan[s]' [go] nuclear and was waging all out digital war.". I'm guessing that is just a thing some men do but it is bound to be made worse by women correctly figuring out the high-engagement equilibrium is tantalising without promising. But a lot of them probably aren't going to realise that they're dealing with unexploded or…

This is in no way exclusive to porn. After running a B2C business for a while I realized that if, as an owner, you should be wary of some people, it needs to be your biggest, most vocal fans. They are the most emotionally attached, feeling they’ve personally invested their money, time and faith into your brand and they are the most violent when disappointed. At some point they all expect special treatment, which make…

> Of course not all fans are like this but it just takes a very vocal minority to create a big problem.

Stock and currency trading forums were early instances of these challenges.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#497

Post by ggggtez »

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 think there are risks to doing porn, but even in this article, the issues are not always related to the porn itself, but bad passwords leading to account compromise, or linking your family identity to your porn identity.

Understand that "I don't like it" is not a convincing argument to anyone but yourself. Be aware of the consequences, but don't over dramatize it. If you only share the worst case examples, your kids will understand that you are using scare tactics and what you are saying is unlikely. They live in this world and will know plenty of counter examples where nothing bad happened to the person in question.

So, be informed, and be reasonable. Express caution, and concern around linking porn to your "real" identity, and the trouble that this causes people. Discuss things protecting your privacy by avoiding showing your face, house, etc. Don't re-use usernames. A person who is informed on the real dangers of how people get found, will be more likely to think twice before posting a nude.

And if your children are of the female persuasion, it's worth pointing out that women tend to get the brunt of "punishment", while men often are not really affected. Maybe if your children are male, you might not want to mention that, but it's probably good for you to be aware of it.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#498

Post by DocTomoe »

Santosh83 wrote: post #43
ryandrake wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The world is changing much faster than human psychology can cope with, which is why you're seeing so much of depression and mental health issues everywhere. We would do better to slow down a notch, but that flies against the face of the capitalistic imperative and the atavistic and ridiculous fear that "if we slow down, the bad guy will outrun us", and hence full-steam ahead on every front. If there is collateral dam…

I think a good argument can be made for mental health issues being more related to a need to perform ever better, more successful, more efficient, more marketable, demonstrating ever more status rather than being exposed to the availability of sexual content.

I've had a talk with a friend who was about to propose the other day. The elaborate planning that went into a questionable display of extravagance (it involved - amongst other aspects - skydivers and a banner being flown behind them) probably put him into more stress than asking the actual question. And worse: this idea of the extravagant proposal has been hammered into this generation ("If he can't even do this for you, is he worthy?"). In the 1920s, when there was maybe a ring (and not a particularly expensive one, either), and a question, things were easier, and people were less stressed about this.

And it's not "only" attracting and "securing" a life mate, it's every aspect of our live that has been blown out of proportion. We have forgotten about the good things in life, like taking some time to watch a vineyard in early autumn as the colors change. Having time for oneself. Having meaningful communities.

Re: Under the skin of OnlyFans

#499

Post by Auracle »

elliekelly wrote: post #388
Dumblydorr wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think children should be spending their allowance money on porn? That's surely helpful for OF's bottom line but I question the ramifications of selling our children's sexuality to a few capitalist coders. Why is it bad? First, teaching children to monetize and sexualize in a capitalistic system, rather than how they evolved which is a more personal and toned down sexual experience. Their psyche is developing,…

Children can’t spend money on OF. Only adults can. Children can spend their money on the SI Swimsuit issue, though. And the SI Body issue. Do you take issue with that sexualization that benefits the capitalist behemoth that is Disney Corp?

Is that true? I had a credit card when I was a teenager. Is there a way for them to check your age or is it “you have a credit card so we assume you’re 18?”

A very similar comparison would be “thots” on Twitch, though.

Post reply on HN