Social media sexualization of western women

B.A._Baracus

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

It's not the same as any other work. There is a stigma attached to it. It can be damaging in regard to self esteem and how others see them.

I don't think there should be a stigma to it when there is none on men for buying it. We can pretend we live in a society that doesn't judge you for this work but we don't.

It could effect future relationships and future jobs. Whether it should or not is another argument.

Take onlyfans.
There is a stigma for a man. That's being a total sucker and a moron paying some woman on onlyfans.

Like, i couldn't use an escort, just not my deal but I understand some men do. But here's the thing about paying for sex - you get sex! What type of ejjit pays some woman to show her goods then gets horny and jerks it. Lol.

You'll literally paying to wa*k off.

Tony EH

EddieN75 wrote: »

On one hand you have women saying respect us and don't sexualise us like cat calling or creepy behaviour while on the other women are getting their bits out for a euro.

Can't have it both ways. If you don't respect yourselves don't expect strangers to either

It's almost like women are individuals with entirely different sensibilities and views and can differ.

How can that be?

beakerjoe

KeepItLight wrote: »

Getting bogged down on semantics. Yes, sex work and manual labour are both work and technically selling your body. But there is more to than that.

As a thought experiment for those who think they are direct equivalents: would you be as happy with your daughter having a career in porn vs working some other office job if there was a guarantee of no harm coming to them in either scenario?

I think those who are honest with themselves would say no.

No one wants their daughter working in the sex industry. Anyone who says otherwise is lying IMO.

Wibbs

nullzero wrote: »

The part of men paying for it is huge. The men that engage in this stuff are what drives it, they need to wise up and fast.

I can't Imagine any bank being too happy with a person applying for a mortgage with a crippling Onlyfans addiction destroying their financial situation. It would be akin to a gambling addiction, but at least you have some outside chance of getting some of your money back from gambling. Paying for what's being discussed here is like setting your money on fire.

It's completely insane. I mean if you want to look at ladyparts, there is enough free stuff out there that if you tried to view 0.0001% of it all at once your modem would go up in smoke from the friction. Paying for it? Jaysus. It's not like gambling in that way. It would only be similar if you could get the same gambling buzz for free and get results for free too. It would be an excellent moron/simp detector to find out a bloke was paying for onlyfans.

EddieN75

Tony EH wrote: »

It's almost like women are individuals with entirely different sensibilities and views and can differ.

How can that be?

But what do you think of women who sell themselves?

What is your opinion?

They can do as they wish but their actions will decide how people view them.

jam_mac_jam

EddieN75 wrote: »

But what do you think of women who sell themselves?

What is your opinion

What do you think of men who pay for it?

Tony EH

Wibbs wrote: »

It's completely insane. I mean if you want to look at ladyparts, there is enough free stuff out there that if you tried to view 0.0001% of it all at once your modem would go up in smoke from the friction. Paying for it? Jaysus. It's not like gambling in that way. It would only be similar if you could get the same gambling buzz for free and get results for free too. It would be an excellent moron/simp detector to find out a bloke was paying for onlyfans.

I can't claim to understand the idea of paying for pornography myself, when you are, literally, a click away from seeing anything you want for free on the the web. To me it's bizarre. Perhaps some feel that the stuff they're getting that they pay for is of more "worth" than the stuff they can get for free? Like those who pay over the odds for that pair of runners, when they're no better than the cheaper, non brand, option at a fraction of the price.

As to the general thrust of the thread, I find it gas. It's like someone just discovered that there's seedy side to life and is shocked by it. But are blissfully unaware that that porn and the sexualisation of women/people has been a facet of societies forever and there's absolutely nothing new to all of this. The only thing that's changed, really, is the delivery system.

The likes of these modern platforms, from what I can gather, are controlled entirely by the individual concerned, though. They aren't at the behest of some group or pornographer who controls what they do or who they do it with and are then discarded when no longer useful.

I think a simple history lesson into how porn was made in the 60's, 70's, etc, would lead people to think that such endeavours are probably safer today, on average, than they were in yesteryear.

KeepItLight

Tony EH wrote: »

As to the general thrust of the thread, I find it gas. It's like someone just discovered that there's seedy side to life and is shocked by it. But are blissfully unaware that that porn and the sexualisation of women/people has been a facet of societies forever and there's absolutely nothing new to all of this. The only thing that's changed, really, is the delivery system.
.

I don't really think you get the point of the thread if that's what you think people are talking about.

Wallet Inspector

EddieN75 wrote: »

But what do you think of women who sell themselves?

What is your opinion?

They can do as they wish but their actions will decide how people view them.

Regarding OnlyFans:

In between "nothing wrong with it, she can do what she wants" and (to a lesser extent nowadays) "it's degrading and tacky", there's a middle ground in my opinion.

I can definitely get the appeal of stripping if you've a great body - for the money to be made and the feeling of empowerment/sexiness... once it's in a safe strip club, not being recorded, and in another country (preferably continent) while living abroad for a few years. You could just put "bar work" or simply "travelling" on your CV ​.

Online though, which anyone could see/record in some form? Unless you have a watertight longterm plan that won't cause this to come back to haunt you, it is unwise imo.

It is her choice, she's not being degraded - it's not in the dangerous, exploitative or coercive categories of sex work, but whether you agree or not, employers and others can be traditional and conservative about pornography and social media activity.

I think the difference is the expectation regarding consequences. In the relative past, porn was obvious... and the people who engaged in it know what reaction they were going to get. They knew that those with moral issues would dislike them, and by engaging in porn, it would put them in the spotlight for all manner of fans, from the gentle to the crazies. It was obvious.

However, with social media, there's a step away from that awareness. You see people putting up "sexy"or revealing images, and they don't see themselves responsible for the attention they receive. Perhaps they're looking for that attention, or perhaps not, but the posing and taking of these images doesn't extend any responsibility for what follows. There's a dislocation from the act and the responsibility for the consequences.

It's the same with beauty and objectification in the real world. A woman who dresses provocatively has the choice to do so. It's her right. However, she''s not responsible for the reactions of those around her. Their reactions are completely dependent on them, as opposed to the woman. So, if she dresses with her breasts exposed, any guy who looks at those breasts are in the wrong, not the person choosing to reveal those breasts. Nor is it both people being responsible for that reaction.. it's just the guy reacting that's wrong for doing so.

That;s where society has moved towards. That people (more often than not, women) can do whatever they wish, appear as they wish, but they're not responsible for what happens thereafter.

And so the perception on beauty, sexiness, etc will continue to shift, since what is forbidden tends to become more fashionably attractive. Women will continue to dress how they wish, pushing the boundaries of what is considered acceptable, and men will respond because they've been conditioned by their own culture (different cultures find different body parts more sexy than others), or by the biological drive to recognise sexual cues. Which, in turn, will justify the outrage over objectification, or unwanted attention, but not change the behavior of the women in the slightest, because the consequences are all external to them. Since they have the right to live, dress, etc whatever the obvious consequences.

Social media, and sexualisation will continue to evolve, and in spite of the desire by many to consider social media as having little impact on real life, our society/culture will change accordingly.

EddieN75

Wallet Inspector wrote: »

In between "nothing wrong with it, she can do what she wants" and (to a lesser extent) "it's degrading and tacky" there's a middle ground in my opinion.

I can definitely get the appeal of stripping if you've a great body - for the money to be made and the feeling of empowerment... once it's in a strip club, not being recorded, and in another country (preferably continent) while living abroad for a few years. You could just put "bar work" on your CV ​.

Online though, which anyone could see/record in some form? Unless you have a watertight longterm plan that won't cause this to come back to haunt you, is unwise imo.

Whether you agree or not, companies can be traditional and conservative about such work.

That's a great answer.

Overheal

Tony EH wrote: »

It's almost like women are individuals with entirely different sensibilities and views and can differ.

How can that be?

You mean SexKitty2002 and Karen in accounting don’t both represent the same demographics? Color me shocked.

Tony EH

Overheal wrote: »

You mean SexKitty2002 and Karen in accounting don’t both represent the same demographics? Color me shocked.

I know. It's incredible.

Overheal

Wibbs wrote: »

It's completely insane. I mean if you want to look at ladyparts, there is enough free stuff out there that if you tried to view 0.0001% of it all at once your modem would go up in smoke from the friction. Paying for it? Jaysus. It's not like gambling in that way. It would only be similar if you could get the same gambling buzz for free and get results for free too. It would be an excellent moron/simp detector to find out a bloke was paying for onlyfans.

But the demand and money flow speaks for itself. These punters want a service, a thrill or whatever they don’t get from just looking at nudes elsewhere. Interaction, personalized/tailored content, whatever.

SnuggyBear

Overheal wrote: »

You mean SexKitty2002 and Karen in accounting don’t both represent the same demographics? Color me shocked.

They are probably the same person these days

Overheal

Tony EH wrote: »

I can't claim to understand the idea of paying for pornography myself, when you are, literally, a click away from seeing anything you want for free on the the web. To me it's bizarre. Perhaps some feel that the stuff they're getting that they pay for is of more "worth" than the stuff they can get for free? Like those who pay over the odds for that pair of runners, when they're no better than the cheaper, non brand, option at a fraction of the price.

As to the general thrust of the thread, I find it gas. It's like someone just discovered that there's seedy side to life and is shocked by it. But are blissfully unaware that that porn and the sexualisation of women/people has been a facet of societies forever and there's absolutely nothing new to all of this. The only thing that's changed, really, is the delivery system.

The likes of these modern platforms, from what I can gather, are controlled entirely by the individual concerned, though. They aren't at the behest of some group or pornographer who controls what they do or who they do it with and are then discarded when no longer useful.

I think a simple history lesson into how porn was made in the 60's, 70's, etc, would lead people to think that such endeavours are probably safer today, on average, than they were in yesteryear.

Some people would be similarly shocked to learn Playboy used to publish on brand photo shoots of children - at least in one instance, for their publication Sugar and Spice, with Brooke Shields. Brooke was 10 years old and the photo shoot was consented to by her mother. A US court somehow determined this did not constitute child pornography. Just to put any shock @ only fans into a bit of perspective.

Tony EH

Overheal wrote: »

Some people would be similarly shocked to learn Playboy used to publish on brand photo shoots of children - at least in one instance, for their publication Sugar and Spice, with Brooke Shields. Brooke was 10 years old and the photo shoot was consented to by her mother. A US court somehow determined this did not constitute child pornography. Just to put any shock @ only fans into a bit of perspective.

In the 70's, I don't think there any hard and fast laws about such things and I'd read about that before. But as you say, her mother was very, shall we say, "pushy" and one of the things she believed would get her noticed was showing off the flesh. There was a lot of controversy about her appearing in such movies as "Pretty Baby" and 'The Blue Lagoon" as well.

Although, Shields carved quite a bit of a career out of it too, despite being an actress of..."limited range".

JimmyVik

bb1234567 wrote: »

It is completely okay if they feel comfortable . Those online platforms gave them an opportunity to 'sell their bodies' in a way that is completely on their terms, comfortable, safe and controlled. So it's not really comparable to prostitution. It's really not up to you. Young girls are being taught they have choice, that's the only thing we should be teaching them, not trying to hammer our our subjective opinion on matters into them before they are mature enought o make up their mind.

You say they have no other qualities..because aesthetics aren't substantial enough to exploit as valid means of income in your opinion. What, would it be better they work on the tills or as janitors if they are that useless, because it's more like good clean hard work. I really have to wonder if people with these kind of stuffy opinions are just jealous of the easy income these womens have found for themselves. If I was a good looking young girl I'd be right with them raking it in on the side..

I for one am definitely jealous of that easy income.
I wish people would pay for me to wear a low cut top
And you are right. They are in charge of their own lives and their own bodies.
Some people seem to want to dictate what others can and cant do with their own looks and bodies.

JimmyVik

nullzero wrote: »

Your laboring (no pun intended) this point.

The notion that all workers are selling their bodies is nonsensical.

Do you really believe that someone sitting at a computer is selling their body?

My back tells me that if I wasnt sitting at work all day, id be much happier

JimmyVik

JimmyVik wrote: »

My back tells me that if I wasnt sitting at work all day, id be much happier

Furiously **** on screen for strangers for a few bob? I am afraid your low cut top would not make the cut. It's fleshlights, oily pecs, athletic gyrating and astonishing cum faces all the way, Jimmy, or else you are making peanuts. Mind yer back.

JimmyVik

isha wrote: »

Furiously **** on screen for strangers for a few bob? I am afraid your low cut top would not make the cut. It's fleshlights, oily pecs, athletic gyrating and astonishing cum faces all the way, Jimmy, or else you are making peanuts. Mind yer back.

I knew I needed to study the market dynamics a bit more before I got into this business

Mic 1972

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

Take onlyfans.
There is a stigma for a man. That's being a total sucker and a moron paying some woman on onlyfans.

Like, i couldn't use an escort, just not my deal but I understand some men do. But here's the thing about paying for sex - you get sex! What type of ejjit pays some woman to show her goods then gets horny and jerks it. Lol.

You'll literally paying to wa*k off.

To each their own
I think it's sad that women consider this an expression of empowerment and liberation when it's a sign of insecurity and low self esteem

mohawk

nullzero wrote: »

The brickie is selling his physical labour.

The cam girl is selling images of her body.

They are selling their bodies in different ways.

The person sitting at home at their PC cannot but be in their physical form as we are all physical beings but they are not selling their body, they are by any objective viewpoint selling their time whilst continuing to be a physical being.

Wasn’t there a girl recently who set up an Onlyfans after she turned 18 and made over a million in 6 hours. Can’t remember her name.
Usually people earn more when the gain experience in their career. Anything to do with sex work it’s usually the younger you are that your earning potential is highest.

mohawk

mohawk wrote: »

Wasn’t there a girl recently who set up an Onlyfans after she turned 18 and made over a million in 6 hours. Can’t remember her name.
Usually people earn more when the gain experience in their career. Anything to do with sex work it’s usually the younger you are that your earning potential is highest.

It's unlikely to be just that she was younger. Innocence sells well before it expires and people become more aware, or cynical.

Leg End Reject

mohawk wrote: »

Wasn’t there a girl recently who set up an Onlyfans after she turned 18 and made over a million in 6 hours. Can’t remember her name.
Usually people earn more when the gain experience in their career. Anything to do with sex work it’s usually the younger you are that your earning potential is highest.

A singer I think? So an established fan base and known already. It was in the AH woke thread.

B.A._Baracus

Leg End Reject wrote: »

A singer I think? So an established fan base and known already. It was in the AH woke thread.

Yeah Bella Thorne. She's an actress. After she created an account she said how she will not be posting nudes.

So basically you were paying for Instagram pictures lol.

Wallet Inspector

Mic 1972 wrote: »

To each their own
I think it's sad that women consider this an expression of empowerment and liberation when it's a sign of insecurity and low self esteem

It depends on the individual I think. I don't agree that it's always due to poor self esteem/respect but I certainly don't agree either with those who claim it's problem-free. I think they just want to show that they're really liberated.

18 seems awfully young, even if legal. Something prematurely jaded about it.

Leg End Reject

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

Yeah Bella Thorne. She's an actress. After she created an account she said how she will not be posting nudes.

So basically you were paying for Instagram pictures lol.

One eyed Jack

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

Yeah Bella Thorne. She's an actress. After she created an account she said how she will not be posting nudes.

So basically you were paying for Instagram pictures lol.

I’m embarrassed to admit I know this, but it was the “Cash me outside” one who claimed to have racked up a million dollars in six hours -

https://www.cinemablend.com/television/2565288/cash-me-outsides-bhad-bhabie-joined-onlyfans-and-broke-records-in-just-6-hours

Took Bella Thorne a whole day… not that I was keeping score or anything >.>

Eric Cartman

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I’m embarrassed to admit I know this, but it was the “Cash me outside” one who claimed to have racked up a million dollars in six hours -

https://www.cinemablend.com/television/2565288/cash-me-outsides-bhad-bhabie-joined-onlyfans-and-broke-records-in-just-6-hours

Took Bella Thorne a whole day… not that I was keeping score or anything >.>

That makes sense that a child that troubled would be the poster child for this kind of thing. Turning a desperate cry for parental love into money is the name of the game now for these 'influencers'