Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

matthewball.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

581–590 of 878 posts

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#581

Post by kowbell »

listless wrote: post #90

Is anyone willing to admit they subscribe to an OF and explain why over the free pornography alternatives that most of the internet is full of?

I have subscribed. I have paid for PPV.

Why? I have disposable income and I feel good when I spend it supporting creators I like. I subscribe to several Patreons of artists and YouTube creators, I’ve got that yearly Nebula subscription locked in, I buy merch and CDs from local bands (even though I don’t really listen to them after shows), and I also will pay folks posting tantalizing stuff on the internet. Sure I can get similar things for free, but sometimes I want content from that person and I see no issue giving them a couple bucks for it. I can afford it, so why not? Why do they not deserve it when I’m willing to also sub to a Patreon for someone who makes cool digital art on Instagram?

The “para-social” aspect is icky to me. At no point do I expect that this person knows who I am or has any care for me; any time I receive messages insinuating or fishing for that I ignore them. My “relationship” to them is a consumer who enjoys their work and is willing to compensate them for it, and that “relationship” only exists for a limited amount of time every so often.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#582

Post by prmoustache »

lupusreal wrote: post #529
prmoustache wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the number of ex or sexual intercourses is the one of the first questions you ask when you are in the "prospective" state, yes that is creepy. And a huge warning sign that you are probably a toxic person. I don't care about ex partners. I'd rather know if my sexuality is compatible with that person and if that person is comfortable/confident with their sexual life.

You added "one of the first questions" to make your position seem less insane, Lmao. Nobody's first question is "have you ever been a porn star" but it's going to come up eventually and, whether or not you care it will definitely be a deal breaker for many.

Your comment above was mentionning "prospective partner", so it implies happening during the early stages of a relationship.

Or I don't know, maybe in your culture you have to wait months / years before considering a partner someone you are dating regularly / spending a significant part of your life with.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#583

Post by sesm »

DiscourseFan wrote: post #570
sesm wrote: post #560

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> clearly it’s not about the content per see which is a dim a dozen and available for free in trove. I think there is a darker side there: many of those subscribers are minors, who discover this kind of content for the first time. That's why OF models stream on Twitch to expand their audience, there are plenty of kids who came there for Minecraft, but will end up subscribing to OF with mom's credit card.

So we should have a service, instead, that pairs up horny teenagers or puts them in group settings where they can explore their sexuality in a more directly social way? Or what do you suggest, that they don’t have an outlet for these urges?

I don't think I have a solution. I'm sure that Twitch is fully aware of this and gets their cut from OF subscriptions that came from Twitch links.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#584

Post by krisoft »

fourside wrote: post #407
BeefWellington wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same reason why kids have paid for Transformers merch, Star Wars merch, band merch, etc. It's a brand, they like it, they want to be reminded of it and show their love of it off. It creates an "in group" which is socially valuable. Streamers are nothing special in that regard.

There is an important difference between a kid spending money on a toy versus spending it on a person.

Would you tell us what is that important difference? Just for those of us who can't read your thoughts yet.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#585

Post by numpad0 »

jappgar wrote: post #277
braza wrote: post #118

Not a moralistic take, but one issue that interests me is the second-order impacts associated with the long tail of producers in OF who do not make a career from it. With traditional adult entertainment, creators are aware of the social ramifications (e.g., social stigma, familial ostracism, difficulty dealing with the future, and so on), and there is a decent theoretical economic framework to measure that. I am not…

The problem here is that ceratain members of our society think sexuality is immoral and that sex performers deserve ostracism. The idea that someone shouldn't be hired for a job because they have/had an OF is puritanism plain and simple. I expect that fewer people actually care about the "morality" and simply want to use morals as a weapon against women in the workplace.

Entirely unironically I believe that that first line is the prime cause of crashing birthrate. Surely labor exploitation contributes substantially followed by urban over-population, but THAT has to be it.

Japan's actually got the least-worst birthrates among Far East, and everyone knows what it's best known for on the Internet.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#586

Post by codingdave »

d_burfoot wrote: post #352

The widespread impact of the OF economy is obvious to many gym-goers. At my local gym you can see the usual assortment of bodybuilding guys (same as it's been for decades), and then you can see 2-3 girls who are clearly trying to make it into the top 0.1% of hotness so they can cash in on OF (or maybe Instagram). This latter group is a recent phenomenon.

I'm not sure what gyms you frequent, but I've always seen more women in the gym than men, and we're talking since the 80s. Women in gyms is not the slightest bit a new thing.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#587

Post by swagasaurus-rex »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #260
medo-bear wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are those sex workers doing something they shouldn't be doing? You are asking a binary question for which there isn't a binary answer. Better to ask are those sex workers doing something they will get a pat on their backs for from other members of society? In a way a builder, chef, firefighter, and even a prison guard would.

Perhaps the lack of a "pat on the back" is society's fault.

Why? it’s so easy to make content

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#588

Post by jajko »

kwhitefoot wrote: post #354
elzbardico wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Err.. count me out of this. I wouldn't deny a job for a former sex worker, but definitelly I wouldn't want to have any kind of personal relationship with one.

Could you explain why?

Human mind, good character, good heart... are all very fragile things, good one can be broken rather easily, a broken one can hardly ever be properly mended back without major cracks that keep coming back ie under stress or hardships.

Nothing is impossible and I talk about lets say rather about unprobable matters. If you want to take additional risks on top of usual risks with new relationships, be anyone's guests, but they are there.

Or maybe you don't care if you have a stable relationship (hardly ever the case but it happens), also fine. At the end, you can approach relationships as probability game, and folks normally want to tilt it in their favor.

Re: Breaking Down OnlyFans' Economics

#590

Post by nobody9999 »

jayd16 wrote: post #518
mudita wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It not only doesn’t require interaction, the lack of interaction is what makes is parasocial.

So like, movies are more para social because they have less interaction?

>So like, movies are more para social because they have less interaction?

More live TV/streaming series than movies, IMHO.

How many times have you heard someone say they just finished watching $SERIES and will miss their TV friends?

And with OnlyFans (I'm guessing here, as I don't use the platform), at least the sexual stuff there (is there other stuff?) it's like going to a strip club, except it's all recorded (and sometimes? mostly? more explicit) and instead of dollar bills in the garters, it's tips/subscriptions.

Post reply on HN