To be considering webcam work?

[AnneNonimous]

Haven't even name changed...eeeek

I am slowly trying to start my own business. Slowly because I don't have enough money, don't yet have enough equipment and am a lone parent.

I have seriously been considering taking up online webcam work to earn extra money to buy the equipment I need.

I have checked out a few websites, you can block certain countries from seeing you so nobody I know would have to find out! Getting undressed is not necessary and infact banned on some sites outside of 'private shows' and I could do it as and when I want (ie when DS is in bed)

Have I completely lost my mind or does it make sense?

Narcissa - Frankly you sound like counselling could be helpful to you. Getting off on sexually performing for strangers is not a psychologically healthy activity. You describe yourself as a sex addict. Sex addicts often are not actually addicted to sex, but like most addicts, using a form of behaviour to cope with a trauma or void that exists in their lives.

You performing camwork is really the equivalent of an alcoholic becoming a wine taster. And I am astounded that anyone can read your comment and think that it is a positive representation of camwork.

It wasn't supposed to be a positive or negative representation - it's just the truth. Anyone can take from it what they will.

I saw it as a positive because she was already doing those things and enjoying, and found a means of profiting from it.

She said she was a sex addict, not is and seems to be in a totally different position now, isn't doing camwork any longer and hasn't suffered ill consequences from the camwork nor from her addictions.

Narcissa - Sorry I was referring to the way some others saw it as a positive representation.

Sunflower - She was a sex addict. How is providing a way for someone to take part in their addiction, a healthy thing? The men who paid her were exploiting her addiction. And you have no idea, and neither do I, if any long term harm has resulted from her addiction.

I know I don't, hence the 'seems'.

I have seen a lot of 'sex addicts' develop much unhealthier habits than making a rational decision to profit from it financially. And it 'seems' she doesn't regret being a camgirl.

I don't regret it, nor do I think it has caused me any harm in the long-term. To me, it was just a bit of fun at the time. I'm well aware it's not the same for everyone. I wouldn't recommend it for everyone, nor will I denigrate it - everyone has their reasons for doing things. If you decide it's not for you, that's fine. If you decide that you enjoy it, that's fine too.

All I can say to anyone who takes it up (like anything else in life) is be safe and be aware.

A statement and a question.

Most males sexually mature while they are in school, which for most of them will mean while wearing uniform. Those of their contemporaries to whom they are attracted will also be in uniform. The school uniform thing for most guys isn't about an older/younger power imbalance (unless your kink runs to power imbalances, but that's another story altogether.) It's about mutually recapturing youth with a partner.

Question: Hypothetically, would those of you who are against camming still feel the same way if the OP or the other women who had given it a shot were broadcasting exclusively to other women? Is it broadcasting sexual acts for titillation what's wrong, or is it the gender of those who enjoy it?

Why don't blokes dress up in school uniform to please women then ?

I am sure there is a niche somewhere for it, but it hardly comprises a large part of this "ageplay" you people on this thread seem to think is part of normal expression of sexuality.

Some blokes do.

The fact that it isn't so much heard about is that like a lot of female sexuality it's been suppressed by Old Society (non-gendered term for what is referred to as the patriarchy), so there could well be a lot of women out there who would love to do it but are too ashamed to admit it or who have a secret hankering that's never been expressed.

Believe me, NF, I think I can safely speak for most of my gender when I say that looking at some hairy-bollocked bloke dressed up in school uniform is not going to light our fire

it's not a sexual turn on for women

unless you by that old adage "laugh 'em into bed..."

You only get one life. Do you want to contribute to society in a positive or negative way?

We are society, what we do in life makes the future for our kids.

If men can buy women it affects us all.

I really wouldn't. But I'm not you.

Neofaust-I just asked my other half and he said he doesn't know, but possibly.

It DEFINITELY makes sense to me. The media plays on it for definite. (St Trinians', anyone)?

Short skirt, long socks, pigtails, sexually stimulating, supposedly.

Men are more visually stimulated. A lot of men just have things about uniforms as well.

One good thing about cam work is the hours are flexible, you can spend time with your children, you can take time off when they're sick/during school hols.

One thing when I was a child, I remember being ill and relatives having to take care of me or other kid's Mums, once being so poorly at an 'after school club'. I never saw my Mother until 7pm ish during the week from age of 3 or 4.

We all have our own feelings on parenting, but I wanted different to that.

Slang, totally agree with your very rational post!

As do I-obviously my last post was to the lines of camwork not being a cause of peodophila and/or abusive men,but Slang put it much better.

Is it not evolution? Women are at their most fertile at about 15 (especially 1000+ years ago when they only lived to 40) where as men are probably strongest and best able to protect their young at about 22.

Yes, EvoPsych bullshit excuses grown men lusting after schoolgirls too. Blah, blah.

Evolution is another part. Note that our age of consent and age of adulthood is cultural, not biological. It wasn't that long ago when being married as a young teenager (or even younger!) was normal.

Indeed,and child protection has moved on a lot since then. It's a flawed argument.

We used to do it, so what is the problem ? There's a lot of things we used to do that are not, and were never, acceptable

The reason many men like adult women to dress a certain way does not concern me whatsoever.
It is a non issue to me, and if it is an issue at all, it is a very different issue to an adult hurting a child.

What's happened to the OP?

I hope she decided against camming work, I really do.

It makes me so sad that there are women out there who are actively choosing to do this. It's sad for us all as it affects us all as women.

Sometimes one has to look at the wider effects of a personal choice.

Indeed.

While I'll conceed that porn may enhance, in males, a pre-existing negative attitude towards women, to focus on porn as causal effectively shifts blame from ACTUAL, complex, causes of ingrained misogyny onto an easy but misidentified target. Perhaps ironically, a far more damaging cause will be familiar to all but the newest Mumsnetter. To give it a 'theme' - Frequent threads by abused women wondering how to save their relationships "for the sake of the kids" and the societal (patriarchal?) pressure(s) upon them to do so. In many instances, by the time they've posted the seeds of misogyny will've been planted in sons and abuse-tolerance in daughters. These days nobody suggests that women should tolerate "a good kicking" and they have encouragement and support to flee. Toddlers who've witnessed abuse can be repaired. More troubling are threads by women who've been emotionally abused for years,,, often so subtley that they're only just waking up to it, or need MNers to wake them up. These women have teens and even kids who've left home - raised in environments of subtle and not-so-subtle abuse. Some will emerge well-balanced but many will not. Again, it's a breeding ground for future misogynists (sons) and their victims (daughters). That's before including societal pressures to sustain or save these environments. Saving marriages "for the sake of the kids" is largely deemed to be a good thing. For sure, doing things for the sake of kids is an admirable sentiment,,, but where do you draw a line? Somewhere between the first time he calls her a 'stupid cow' and when he puts her in hospital,, but where exactly? How much, if any, abuse should a woman tolerate for the sake of her children? None? A bit? Then, if abuse is identified and the couple elect to attend counselling, should the kids be removed from the home since both parties acknowlege the harmful environment? Assuming the counselling works, is it a case of "a few more weeks won't hurt (the kids)"? Maybe it will. After years of witnessing it, who knows at what point potential misogynists/victims are irredeemable? Worth noting is that the parents of todays abusers grew up in an environment where pornography was largely unavailiable. The notion that porn is causal, rather than a very small part of a much wider and VERY complicated problem, is largely innacurate. There is no easy solution to the above,, and that's without stirring female-on-male violence into the mix. There's no evidence that well adjusted kids are converted to misogyny by porn, or into violent offenders by watching Goodfellas. There's overwhelming evidence that asocial kids are the products of disfunctional homes. Ergo, there exists an argument for banning familes rather than porn. Given the evidence, it's no more riduculous,,, ridiculous though it is since most people emerge as socially adequate. The idea that banning porn will protect women and cure society's ills serves no purpose beyond selling copies of the Daily Heil and providing politicians with soundbites.

hmm.
my mother told me 'no evidence'.
don't leave marks, don't have marks left on you.
don't write letters. don't give presents.
no evidence.
certainly don't be filmed. get a telephone sex job instead.

SlangKing, that was rather difficult to read, but worth it :)

I do do phone sex too, I have a distinctive voice which is a big seller. I agree It's potentially a lot 'safer' however many customers want to see who they're talking to , first.

Difficult to read? It was a mofo to write, lol. Hard to judge in this instance what's too much and what's not enough. Not the first time I've posted stuff that's clear to me so I assume it will be to others,, only to discover I'm mistaken. must try harder - or stick to 'easy' threads.