Girls and OnlyFans

bubblypop

bubblypop wrote: »

Well I was actually responding to the posters who say it's not fair to the children.
And yes, again, it wouldn't bother me if it was my.other half doing it!
I don't view it as anything like cheating, it's just a job.
But that's my opinion and how I see it.

You don't need to keep repeating it's your opinion. We know

YellowLead

bubblypop wrote: »

No it wouldn't bother me. I'm not sure why people are so surprised by that, lots of posters said it wouldn't bother them.
And I do think others are very judgy, but that's my opinion right?

Not lots - only a tiny minority said they would be in a relationship with somebody on OF btw.

And bubblypop, you'd be happy for your wife or sister or daughter to be a stripper or masturbate live? Just a job. Their bodies. Less technology.

YellowLead

bubblypop wrote: »

That's ok
I don't care what you think
#shrugs#

Lol I don’t care what you think either but this is a discussion forum and you keep participating so...
It’s a shame you have to stoop to insulting other posters to get your point across and when they respond in kind ‘I don’t care what you think’ is the best you can do

YellowLead

YellowLead wrote: »

Lol I don’t care what you think either but this is a discussion forum and you keep participating so...
It’s a shame you have to stoop to insulting other posters to get your point across and when they respond in kind ‘I don’t care what you think’ is the best you can do

I haven't insulted anyone.
I'm fact, I think you may have insulted me. But I won't take offence because I don't care what you think of me.
I'm not sure why you think that's an.insult. It is in fact being nice

bubblypop

bubblypop wrote: »

I haven't insulted anyone.
I'm fact, I think you may have insulted me. But I won't take offence because I don't care what you think of me.
I'm not sure why you think that's an.insult. It is in fact being nice

Judgemental, hypocritical, old fashioned.. lovely terms.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

And bubblypop, you'd be happy for your wife or sister or daughter to be a stripper or masturbate live? Just a job. Their bodies. Less technology.

I have already said, I wouldn't care of that's what they did for a living.
If noone is getting hurt and it's not illegal, fine. I may be worried about safety etc given that a lot of strip clubs may be located in less then city centre safe locations. But if they were happy that security is ok, then it's basically the same as doing it online, if they are on a stage.

Anyway, my opinion is it wouldn't bother me, that's me. And plenty of others. So that's that!

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Judgemental, hypocritical, old fashioned.. lovely terms.

Ah here!
I can be very judgy about somethings, very!
I can also be a bit hypocritical too sometimes. But I don't mind admitting it.

You probably wouldn't care about things I'm judgemental about.

Purple is a Fruit

Deleted User wrote: »

The issue for most people is that we place some importance on the act of sex. It's a deeply intimate and personal activity. When a stranger does it on a camera, you can remove the intimacy because it is a stranger. When it's your girlfriend doing it on camera, she's revealing something that would normally be a very private activity, and a large part of why we have relationships is that we become exclusive with each other. We, typically, don't want everyone to see our girlfriends/boyfriends naked or in the act of having sex.

Now, perhaps that is old-fashioned, but I don't think it actually is. Open relationships are very rare, because they don't last. Jealousy is a very strong human condition, as is the possessiveness that comes with being in a serious relationship. Few people can love someone, while they're off having sex with others..

Now, we're in the age, where people claim all manner of open-minded stances regarding sex, but I seriously doubt that most people have left behind the importance of exclusivity for relationships.

There's a lot of blurring going on in this thread, where issues are being grouped together. Your girlfriend getting naked online is likely to be a very different issue than your girlfriend masturbating online, or even having sex with someone else online (with or without your knowledge).

And that's the problem really. The subtleties are being discarded, so that it's easier for people to claim being open-minded, and easier to call others old-fashioned.

Your view isn't old fashioned at all, it's the standard.

When people resort to "you're backwards/old fashioned/prudish", they've nothing else to offer - that's how weak their argument is. Those who are afraid of looking vanilla are the oppressed ones.

Purple is a Fruit

Purple is a Fruit wrote: »

Your view isn't old fashioned at all, it's the standard.

When people resort to "you're backwards/old fashioned/prudish", they've nothing else to offer - that's how weak their argument is. Those who are afraid of looking vanilla are the oppressed ones.

Ahh well, I find the people who are most open-minded about sex/relationships are the people with the least experience of it. It's mostly theory, and theory is easy to be unemotional about.

They've never had an open relationship, so don't know the problems that crop up, except from what they've heard from other open-minded people. We all seek to experiment when we're young, but as we get older and more experienced, most people quickly realise that these old-fashioned boundaries are there for solid reasons. Or their opportunities to experiment are limited, so they retain their open-mindedness about things they haven't done themselves. Simple human nature, although the internet exasperates it considerably.

KyussB

Deleted User wrote: »

Were you open-minded up enough as a 12-year-old to appreciate the extra holidays your mother earned by masturbating for strangers online? Open-minded enough to take the slagging and ignore those other backwards kids? Your morals here seem to be that people, even children, should just accept something as long as it's profitable enough.

Many of the people on OF are literally driven into that work to provide for their kid/kids, as they have no choice after losing work during the pandemic.

KyussB

KyussB wrote: »

Many of the people on OF are literally driven into that work to provide for their kid/kids, as they have no choice after losing work during the pandemic.

And many many many more literally aren't.

Purple is a Fruit

KyussB wrote: »

Many of the people on OF are literally driven into that work to provide for their kid/kids, as they have no choice after losing work during the pandemic.

And this is one of the problematic aspects in relation to sex work in general.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Ahh well, I find the people who are most open-minded about sex/relationships are the people with the least experience of it. It's mostly theory, and theory is easy to be unemotional about.

They've never had an open relationship, so don't know the problems that crop up, except from what they've heard from other open-minded people. We all seek to experiment when we're young, but as we get older and more experienced, most people quickly realise that these old-fashioned boundaries are there for solid reasons. Or their opportunities to experiment are limited, so they retain their open-mindedness about things they haven't done themselves. Simple human nature, although the internet exasperates it considerably.

There is a difference in being open minded and having an open relationship.

Mister Vain

Deleted User wrote: »

There's a lot of blurring going on in this thread, where issues are being grouped together. Your girlfriend getting naked online is likely to be a very different issue than your girlfriend masturbating online, or even having sex with someone else online (with or without your knowledge).

That's a fair point, but then where do you draw the line? Would you be ok with your girlfriend posting lingerie photos online? Or topless? Or videos of her farting for the more discerning weirdos?

KyussB

Purple is a Fruit wrote: »

And this is one of the problematic aspects in relation to sex work in general.

Where does the problem lay, if a person on OF is doing the work to pay for their kid/kids?

The theme of the thread so far, is that the problem is with the person who has gone on to OF - not that circumstances have pressured them into that kind of work.

Some even acknowledge a person being made victim by circumstances like this, to suit their argument - while condemning their actions at the same time - which is contradictory and victim blaming pretty much.

KyussB

Wibbs wrote: »

That does seem to be a theme alright. The earnings, imaginary or no are to the fore in this debate. So long as the money is good, or good enough, play ball. It does somewhat remind me of this narrative:

Would you sleep with me for ten million quid?

Mmmmm, that's very tempting. Yes

Would you sleep with me for ten quid?

How dare you!! No! What do you think I am??!!

Oh I think we've established what you are, we're just haggling over the price.

It does seem one's moral position and attitudes to something can shift depending on the payout involved. I suspect the attitudes would be less comfortable if playing hide the French tickler to an audience of online onanists only paid a couple of hundred quid a month.

I mean, if you replace the term 'sleep with', with any other kind of work - that applies to the whole labour market?

People on OF generally don't sleep with others either. There are innumerable regular jobs which are 1: Less dignified, 2: Pay less for worse work, 3: Are a hell of a lot more morally/ethically questionable, and 4: Are way more damaging to peoples lives (including not just to the people doing the work).

For some on OF, that work is actually a way to escape regular jobs, and have some control over their own working lives.

People don't bat an eyelid at the way people are treated like shit in the economy and with regular jobs - it's just accepted as normal.
Add **** to the equation though, and then even if the regular job market (or lack of) has forced people into this kind of work, people will suddenly care quite a lot - about blaming and shaming the person doing the work. Bizarre.

KyussB

Purple is a Fruit wrote: »

When someone suggested that children could face ridicule over their parents doing such work, your response was "I didn't give two sh1ts what people said to me when I was a child" (as if it's only about you) and then you say people didn't give you much hassle as a child anyway? Flawless logic.

Children can (and used to a lot more in the past) face ridicule for their parents being gay, too - that doesn't make being gay morally wrong.

The problem obviously, is with social attitudes that would lead to that ridicule in the first place - which has changed a lot with gay couples, and is gradually changing with varieties of sex work now as well.

"circumstances have pressured them into that kind of work" / "victim blaming"

These are not positive ways to describe the industry that most of us would rather the people we love not be in.

Chacha97

Just a thought. As the world begins to open back up and people are getting out more are these people on these platforms jeopardising their futures?
I mean in terms of stuff like work, social etc. Like they were able to produce their content when we were locked up and had nothing to do but scroll on phones but as economy opens up think people are going to stop their subs to such platforms.
Granted there will be ones still making money with big followings but I feel there will be a lot of people who regret the decision to set up as they are forced to interact socially with people(friends) who may want to distance themselves, intimate pictures are all over the Internet, won't be able for reputable work for brands and companies imo.

It's no wonder it's so prevalent when you see how the ideological battle was won years ago when you see people seeing no difference between it and working in an office..

How much of our humanity has been lost..

BorneTobyWilde

bubblypop wrote: »

I have already said, I wouldn't care of that's what they did for a living.
If noone is getting hurt and it's not illegal, fine.

Are you a lesbian. People keep asking if you'd be happy for your girlfriend to do OFs, but you're a girl.

BorneTobyWilde

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Are you a lesbian. People keep asking if you'd be happy for your girlfriend to do OFs, but you're a girl.

I'm not sure how that is anyone's business?

BorneTobyWilde

LillySV wrote: »

I have more respect for full out prostitutes

That's the thing with a lot of girls on OFs, they're young, still living at home, and making hardcore material in their parents house in their bedroom with their Barbies and My Little Ponies still on their shelf in the background.
Then some of their material is leaked, and all hell breaks loose.


If you are going to do OFs pay up for a full length page advertisement in a national newspaper and be ''full out, loud and proud''


Doing it in secret never works out well.

KyussB

Deleted User wrote: »

"circumstances have pressured them into that kind of work" / "victim blaming"

These are not positive ways to describe the industry that most of us would rather the people we love not be in.

That description applies to the labour market overall though, not this specific industry.

A person forced by circumstances into e.g. a job bridge type workfare program, is being screwed over quite significantly - and look at the way dole recipients are talked about etc..

This is part of why I advocate a Job Guarantee all the time - nobody would ever have to be forced by circumstances into these lines of work.

One eyed Jack

KyussB wrote: »

I mean, if you replace the term 'sleep with', with any other kind of work - that applies to the whole labour market?

People on OF generally don't sleep with others either. There are innumerable regular jobs which are 1: Less dignified, 2: Pay less for worse work, 3: Are a hell of a lot more morally/ethically questionable, and 4: Are way more damaging to peoples lives (including not just to the people doing the work).

For some on OF, that work is actually a way to escape regular jobs, and have some control over their own working lives.

People don't bat an eyelid at the way people are treated like shit in the economy and with regular jobs - it's just accepted as normal.
Add **** to the equation though, and then even if the regular job market (or lack of) has forced people into this kind of work, people will suddenly care quite a lot - about blaming and shaming the person doing the work. Bizarre.

Am I misrepresenting you now when it appears you actually are trying to equate prostitution with legitimate employment?

Of course people do care that people are treated fairly in regular employment, it’s how employment legislation came to exist. They also care that people aren’t exploited, which is how laws regarding prostitution came to exist. It’s not simply a question of adding **** into the equation, it’s that you’re trying to engender sympathy for people who choose to prostitute themselves, and you wonder why people don’t care.

The fact is that people do care, and it’s precisely because people do care that they wouldn’t want anyone they care about involved in prostitution.

BorneTobyWilde

If you're not willing to go on national tv like that Matty Boring Gilbert then OFs is not for you.

The WHOLE point is to get your name out there, not to hide in the shadows.

bubblypop

bubblypop wrote: »

I'm not sure how that is anyone's business?

Sure we're just strangers online. Surely you can share your sexuality with us.

KyussB

KyussB wrote: »

That description applies to the labour market overall though, not this specific industry.

A person forced by circumstances into e.g. a job bridge type workfare program, is being screwed over quite significantly - and look at the way dole recipients are talked about etc..

This is part of why I advocate a Job Guarantee all the time - nobody would ever have to be forced by circumstances into these lines of work.

A person forced by circumstances into a job... I agree job bridge was shocking, but do you mean people who need to pay for stuff?

Dole recipients are normally talked about ok unless it's the career dole recipient who doesn't want to work.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Sure we're just strangers online. Surely you can share your sexuality with us.

I can. But it has no relevance to the discussion and I'm not sure why now, two posters have asked me.

bubblypop

bubblypop wrote: »

I can. But it has no relevance to the discussion and I'm not sure why now, two posters have asked me.

Will you tell us for $15 a month?

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Will you tell us for $15 a month?

I have a job where I am happy with my salary, I have no interest in side hussles, thanks though

bubblypop

bubblypop wrote: »

There is a difference in being open minded and having an open relationship.

Trust you to take such a thing from my post.

The reference to an open relationship was made because it represents most of the perspectives here supporting OnlyFans or similar. That you're fine with them having sex with others, or wouldn't judge your partner for doing things online.

Mister Vain

Mister Vain wrote: »

That's a fair point, but then where do you draw the line? Would you be ok with your girlfriend posting lingerie photos online? Or topless? Or videos of her farting for the more discerning weirdos?

Personally, I wouldn't have issues with lingerie/nude photos because it's simply a showing of the body. Whereas a video with associated actions would be wrong from my partner.. because those who do videos are required to do more each time to keep the attention of others, so she might start by posing, and then, later be encouraged towards masturbating, and once that's reached, go on to something more, just to keep the attention of her viewers.

People doing videos or camgirls have to meet the needs of their audience too much. Those simply doing photos, have a more of a take it or leave it attitude. It's the difference between a once off sale versus the demands required to keep a constant service running. But, no, I wouldn't want my partner to be doing any kind of porn. (And no, I don't watch porn myself.)

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Trust you to take such a thing from my post.

The reference to an open relationship was made because it represents most of the perspectives here supporting OnlyFans or similar. That you're fine with them having sex with others, or wouldn't judge your partner for doing things online.

Oh I wouldn't be fine with my other half having sex with others.
Now if they had an onlyfans account, I would view that as a job, nothing to bother me.
You said yourself you had girlfriends that worked as strippers, did that bother you?

bubblypop

bubblypop wrote: »

Oh I wouldn't be fine with my other half having sex with others.
Now if they had an onlyfans account, I would view that as a job, nothing to bother me.
You said yourself you had girlfriends that worked as strippers, did that bother you?

It didn't bother me that they were dancing/lapdancing for other men, because I knew that the rules (concerning the audience) were enforced..

Now, that I'm older, I'd probably have more issue with having a partner who was a stripper. It hasn't arisen, because I know the associated problems firsthand, in terms of personality, and the issues with prostitution.

SnuggyBear

KyussB wrote: »

Children can (and used to a lot more in the past) face ridicule for their parents being gay, too - that doesn't make being gay morally wrong.

The problem obviously, is with social attitudes that would lead to that ridicule in the first place - which has changed a lot with gay couples, and is gradually changing with varieties of sex work now as well.

Children will use any ammo they can, they are vicious.

Mister Vain

Deleted User wrote: »

Personally, I wouldn't have issues with lingerie/nude photos because it's simply a showing of the body. Whereas a video with associated actions would be wrong from my partner.. because those who do videos are required to do more each time to keep the attention of others, so she might start by posing, and then, later be encouraged towards masturbating, and once that's reached, go on to something more, just to keep the attention of her viewers.

People doing videos or camgirls have to meet the needs of their audience too much. Those simply doing photos, have a more of a take it or leave it attitude. It's the difference between a once off sale versus the demands required to keep a constant service running. But, no, I wouldn't want my partner to be doing any kind of porn. (And no, I don't watch porn myself.)

Actually when you put it like that, I can see where you're coming from. I wouldn't say the explicit videos are wrong as such, but I'd probably be a bit more wary than if it was just nude photos she was posting.

In saying that, most of the girls I know who are on Onlyfans are just posting photos and non-explicit videos, or at least to the best of my knowledge anyway. Pre-covid I met a fair few models in the various photography group shoots around the country, and since the pandemic started, a lot of them have started using Onlyfans, which they promote on their Instagram. The girls with the large followings seem to be doing well.

Another thing that became popular during the pandemic is models doing remote shoots from their homes, where they set up a camera and the photographer is able to operate the controls via an app.

Mister Vain

Mister Vain wrote: »

Actually when you put it like that, I can see where you're coming from. I wouldn't say the explicit videos are wrong as such, but I'd probably be a bit more wary than if it was just nude photos she was posting.

In saying that, most of the girls I know who are on Onlyfans are just posting photos and non-explicit videos, or at least to the best of my knowledge anyway. Pre-covid I met a fair few models in the various photography group shoots around the country, and since the pandemic started, a lot of them have started using Onlyfans, which they promote on their Instagram. The girls with the large followings seem to be doing well.

Another thing that became popular during the pandemic is models doing remote shoots from their homes, where they set up a camera and the photographer is able to operate the controls via an app.

I don't know anyone on Onlyfans, but I know a few women who used to use the MyCams site, which is similar. They were all into very sexual content, which is what the site is aimed at. OnlyFans seems to be moving away from sexual content though. From what I've read, sites such as these start with sex workers, and NSFW content in order to build a following, and then, slowly weed them out as they attract more moderate content creators. However, this is the internet, and society is moving towards a relaxation of rules/taboos, so I wouldn't be too surprised if Onlyfans kept it's sexual content, but reinforced it's rules against using the platform for advertising of escorting.

In any case, I have no issue with people doing normal online content.

completedit

It's so sad that this is becoming normalised.

Chacha97

completedit wrote: »

It's so sad that this is becoming normalised.

I worry what will happen with these "content creators" when society opens back up. Granted sone have a large following so will be ok but there will be numerous who can't make a career of this and will have put themselves out there

* I also see quite a lot of young girls in particular trying to become instagram famous. I've seen quite a few sponsored posts that they've paid for in the hope of gathering followers. While I understand it for the likes of fitness pages that are offering a service these girls are just trying to become famous with no service and hope that they will just be paid by companies for posts etc.

completedit

completedit wrote: »

It's so sad that this is becoming normalised.

It really, really is..

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

It really, really is..

Because many people don't like the idea of consequences. People should be able to behave any way they wish, but consequence shouldn't be a consideration. Just as the movement to approve sexual behavior as being commonly acceptable, (in ways like OnlyFans or Youtube), will have an effect on society, and how people behave "normally". These same people will only look at the changes they approve of, disregarding the negative changes as being unrelated to what they wanted... The increase of freedom, and the reduction of sexual taboos/morality, is all that matters, even though it also will affect the boundaries and social boundaries that served to minimize more aggressive or dangerous behavior... because these people only see what they want to see, believing that their changes will only extend to the people they're concerned about. Alas, that's never been the way the people or the world works.

To me, that's what's really sad. This social movement that promotes the lack of appreciation for consequence focusing on one issue, while disregarding what arise from it.

KyussB

Isn't it far more damaging to society, to have widespread acceptance of involuntary unemployment which pressures people into exploitative/undignified work in general? (and incentivizes others into doing the exploiting)

The moral standard expressed, emphasizes 'individual responsibility' and blames many who are victims, absolving responsibility from the rest of us for solving the problem (of involuntary unemployment, driving people into work like OF) - when it's really a problem we have collective responsibility for, which creates many victims, that we have a collective responsibility for solving.

One eyed Jack

KyussB wrote: »

Isn't it far more damaging to society, to have widespread acceptance of involuntary unemployment which pressures people into exploitative/undignified work in general? (and incentivizes others into doing the exploiting)

The moral standard expressed, emphasizes 'individual responsibility' and blames many who are victims, absolving responsibility from the rest of us for solving the problem (of involuntary unemployment, driving people into work like OF) - when it's really a problem we have collective responsibility for, which creates many victims, that we have a collective responsibility for solving.

There’s no widespread acceptance of involuntary unemployment, and unemployment during the current economic circumstances certainly can’t be used as an excuse to justify anyone choosing to prostitute themselves when there are numerous other opportunities available to them to contribute to society and earn a living for themselves from legitimate employment in areas where they are protected by employment legislation.

In any case, no, it’s nothing to do with involuntary unemployment, and everything to do with social media companies not wishing to promote prostitution on their platforms, hence why there were a number of prostitutes complained when their incomes were threatened by celebrities such as Bella Thorne having an account on OnlyFans, and that came hot on the heels of their accounts being banned on tiktok for promoting adult content in violation of tiktoks terms and conditions, leaving them with only Twitter as one of the last major platforms where they could still promote themselves -


Sex workers blame Bella Thorne for changes at OnlyFans that harm their income

OnlyFans Creators and Sex Workers Are Getting ‘Purged’ from TikTok


How long that lasts is anyone’s guess before the next platform emerges and prostitutes are all over it. What victims exactly? I don’t see any prostitutes offering discounts to the involuntarily unemployed? The responsibility for addressing their involuntary unemployment is ultimately the individual’s responsibility, it’s not society’s responsibility to accommodate prostitution.

KyussB

Just to note, I disengaged from replying to the above poster many pages ago.

Purple is a Fruit

KyussB wrote: »

Where does the problem lay, if a person on OF is doing the work to pay for their kid/kids?.

Being forced into sex work I mean. This is one of the problems with sex work. You gave the example of of people doing OF because they have no other option to put food on the table.

I'm not trying to stop people from doing the work - the way I see it, if they're adults and want to do it and have safe, secure homes, that's entirely up to them. But I don't think "fair play to them", I think it could come back to haunt them and they really should have a plan B for the future.

I also disagree with normalising sex work because of all the horror it causes around the world.

And I really don't think crappy jobs compare because at least you keep your clothes on/don't engage in sex acts.

Wibbs

KyussB wrote: »

Just to note, I disengaged from replying to the above poster many pages ago.

Well then maybe stop engaging? One eyed Jack stop replying to KyussB's posts. The schoolyard bickering between the two of you is getting tiresome for all concerned.

KyussB

Purple is a Fruit wrote: »

Being forced into sex work I mean. This is one of the problems with sex work. You gave the example of of people doing OF because they have no other option to put food on the table.

I'm not trying to stop people from doing the work - the way I see it, if they're adults and want to do it and have safe, secure homes, that's entirely up to them. But I don't think "fair play to them", I think it could come back to haunt them and they really should have a plan B for the future.

I also disagree with normalising sex work because of all the horror it causes around the world.

And I really don't think crappy jobs compare because at least you keep your clothes on/don't engage in sex acts.

Is it a bigger indignity to take your clothes off on OF, than it is to be forced to work for free on e.g. job bridge or such? Is it more morally compromising to take your clothes off on OF, than it is to work for e.g. Paddy Power?

If OF work came back to haunt someone (as it may do), I'd view that as a societal problem, much like discrimination against people who are outed as gay.

Legally, OF work is already normalized. It may be sex work, but its exploitative side shares more in common with exploitation in the labour market in general - than it does with exploitation in the wider sex industry around the world.

KyussB

KyussB wrote: »

Is it a bigger indignity to take your clothes off on OF, than it is to be forced to work for free on e.g. job bridge or such? Is it more morally compromising to take your clothes off on OF, than it is to work for e.g. Paddy Power?
.

Yes..

Yes, it is..