Your opinion on onlyfans?

[ConservativeC2]

What do you all think of onlyfans? I know some people see it as empowering and allow women to take control of their body and choices.

I think completely the opposite - I come from a conservative background and it's not something that sits easy with me. I think there's so much wrong with it, it promotes the idea of men owning or being able to buy women.

I also think it's terrible. If I had a daughter and she chose to become an onlyfans model, I would be distraught. I don't understand why so many women are fine with it and I also think people like Bonnie blue are absolutely poor role models for young girls.

It's gotten so bad that I don't even know if I'm allowed to criticise it openly. What do you think?

I don't think this equivalence works tbh. Men are more visually stimulated and also more sexually driven due to testosterone. They'd probs do it more if it made them rich but it's unlikely that it'd be as popular with women.

Like with prostitution, the issue is much more nuanced than it may appear, and with some inconvenient truths which are politically incorrect to say and which trigger some women, but which remain true nonetheless. Truth hurts.

Like with prostitution, some women do it because they are exploited, because society hasn't given them other chances, etc.
But, like with prostitution, some women do it quite simply because it's an easy way to make more money with less effort.

Showing your boobs on camera, or opening your legs to a few strangers, can easily make you more money than a stressful, insecure, minimum wage job.

And don't forget that there are plenty of men doing minimum wage jobs, and they do not have the option to make money escorting or on OF (at least not to a comparable extent).

As for exploitation, it depends.
There are men who have spent fortunes on OF. Who is exploiting whom in those cases? An argument could be made that, in fact, some of these OF women are exploiting vulnerable, **ntstruck men making them fritter away loads of money.

Do you remember the memes about the "model" who charged her biggest fan $10,000 for an in-person meet, then used the money to go on holiday? Who exploited whom there?

What scares me about OF is that I wonder if it attracts the pervs, or incentivises the perversion and delusion, of having some kind of personal connection with the women in question. If you just want to look at beautiful women, whether clothed naked or doing the deed, there are plenty of free resources online.
But chatting to your favourite model, sending her requests, paying her so she poses in a specific way for you etc, that's creepy. I do wonder if it fuels delusions perversions and mental health issues.

@Jellyrose20 If something is truly empowering men would be doing it. Men in their droves are not doing it. Therefore it is not empowering.
It is exploitation marketed as empowering in a capitalist society.

Nonsense. Men don't do it (at least not to a comparable extent) because there is no market for it.
Since the dawn of time, sex has always been more important for men than women. Sure, with exceptions, but that's always been the general trend for the world.
In fact, porn is one of those industries where men make much less than women. Why? It's not because the matriarchy has taken over, it is, banally, because most porn customers are men, and they care about the women, not the men.

The very top earners are making millions a month - Blac Chyna makes over $20m a month!

Are you really claiming that Blac Chyna makes 240 million per year on Only Fans?

Don't be silly.

So they want to be a virtual prostitute but using a fancier title

I don’t think this holds up. Women for the most part dont want to see random shirtless men, it’s just not that arousing to most women. Certainly not enough to pay. If women did, the men would be signing up to OF in droves. But there’s no market other than directed at gay men, which in fairness, some men have entered.

And don't forget that there are plenty of men doing minimum wage jobs, and they do not have the option to make money escorting or on OF (at least not to a comparable extent).

Poor chaps. But! They could do gay sites...

As for exploitation, it depends.
There are men who have spent fortunes on OF. Who is exploiting whom in those cases? An argument could be made that, in fact, some of these OF women are exploiting vulnerable, ntstruck men making them fritter away loads of money.

Presuming they have the money to spend? Or are they going into debt - is that it? And the dreadful Only Fans women are living the high life on the unfortunate men's debt?

Do you remember the memes about the "model" who charged her biggest fan $10,000 for an in-person meet, then used the money to go on holiday?

No. Do you remember Andrew Tate explaining to guys how to "get" their girls working on Only Fans and how to keep the money?

In fact, porn is one of those industries where men make much less than women. Why? It's not because the matriarchy has taken over, it is, banally, because most porn customers are men, and they care about the women, not the men.

Hermann Müller - German brothel owner - worth 11 million euro

Haki Simsek - German brothel owner - owes German Gov 17.5 million tin SS payments - gives a good idea of turnover

Hermann Müller - German brothel owner - sold his brothel to Chinese investor for 11 million Euro

Ethical Capital Partners - paid 1.5 billion dollars for Porn Hub. Not to the "performers" mind, but to the tech guys who set it up - Fady Mansour, Feras Antoon and D. Tassillo.

Leonid Radvinsky - owner of OnlyFans - worth north of 7 billion US.

He bought it from the charming father and son duo, Tim and Guy Stokeley.

That is at a glance and all verified based on tax returns and company data.

Find a comparable list of women with the same scale of wealth to prove this statement - porn is one of those industries where men make much less than women.

Also - have a look at the numbers - most of that spend is from men as you rightly point out. They seem to have a massive amount of disposable income.

@andIsaid Poor chaps. But! They could do gay sites...

I don't understand this snarky comment.
Do you feel triggered by the fact that an unqualified attractive woman can make money on OF or escorting, while an equally unqualified attractive man cannot, at least not to a comparable extent?

Presuming they have the money to spend? Or are they going into debt - is that it? And the dreadful Only Fans women are living the high life on the unfortunate men's debt?

I have no idea. But, if a woman on OF feeds the delusion of certain lonely, socially inept, **ntstruck men that they have a "relationship" with her, that they "communicate" with her, and this way they keep spending loads on her on OF, who is exploiting whom?

Find a comparable list of women with the same scale of wealth to prove this statement - porn is one of those industries where men make much less than women.

Sigh.. Let me rephrase, then:
Among those who work directly in the sex industry, be it as sex workers, as porn actors, or as OF "content creators", women tend to make more money than men, because of banal market dynamics, because more men want to pay women for these "services" than the other way round. Do you disagree?

Among those who exploit these sex services, I have no idea. It may well be that there are more men than women exploiting these services and these sex workers. I do not know.

I remember the case in the pres of a woman running a London "escort agency". https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/mother-marie-mckinlay-cleared-of-running-ps500-000-prostitution-racket-8323505.html
I have no idea how many such "escort agency owners" are men or women,

Also - have a look at the numbers - most of that spend is from men as you rightly point out. They seem to have a massive amount of disposable income.

I do not understand the logic. What are you trying to say, what is your point?

By the same logic, would you dismiss as a non-problem that many people are frittering money away on a gambling addiction, because evidently they have disposable income? I do not understand. Can you please clarify?

I don't think it's realistic to say that Bonnie Blue is exploited. She exploits. She does this by breaking every taboo she can think of for money. Same with any other OF model making lots of money I reckon.

Leave the ideology aside. If you get rich doing something, doing that thing doesn't make you a victim. There may be other reasons why a thing a person does is wrong.

I think there's too much nuance for me to say a solid 'for' or 'against'. On the one hand, there are plenty of women who make great money on there and are very happy to do so - I know some of them. It does give them a level of control, people should be free to make their own choices, and I know some creators genuinely do find it empowering. It also isn't only women: so we can't argue that it's just women whose bodies are being commodified (and I don't, on the whole, think there's anything wrong with the basic concept of selling access to your body should you wish, when divorced from the context).

But then the context is that it is MOSTLY women and it's undeniable that the idea of women's bodies as a product is linked to sexism. And - those who do best on there tend to be young and and perhaps not thinking about the longevity of the consequences (although it's much less stigmatised nowadays - maybe that will continue). And there's no way to remove those pictures once they're on the internet so a very high risk to trying it for a bit and then changing your mind. And it encourages a parasocial relationship with the creators that to me feels worse than selling videos - you're very encouraged to strike up conversations with your buyers and nurture those to make more money, which is time consuming and emotionally exhausting and I'd imagine in some cases could end up being dangerous for creators.

I often wonder how many men are involved on the other side of the camera. I can imagine many controlling boyfriends like to get their girlfriends involved, realising it's a way to make money at little cost to themselves. And I bet there are large-scale sex traffickers involved too. It allows you to create the illusion that the women are genuinely happy to be there more easily than traditional pornography distribution methods, and to avoid scrutiny.

They’re just prostitutes. They can dress it up any way they like but to me it’s prostitution. And tbh unless a woman is in desperate need of money then I think doing onlyfans is grim and grubby. If I knew someone who was doing it then yes I would judge them and think of them as a bit of a tramp. Fingering yourself on camera for unknown blokes etc is cringy.

@boxofbuttons And there's no way to remove those pictures once they're on the internet so a very high risk to trying it for a bit and then changing your mind.

Yes! The paradox is that OF is much safer than escorting (or whatever we wanna call it), but OF is forever because the internet never forgets, so it is easier to try escorting for a bit then quit, then to try OF for a bit then leave!

And it encourages a parasocial relationship with the creators that to me feels worse than selling videos - you're very encouraged to strike up conversations with your buyers and nurture those to make more money, which is time consuming and emotionally exhausting and I'd imagine in some cases could end up being dangerous for creators.

But it can also be dangerous for the "fans", not physically dangerous but mentally. Some of these people will delude themselves they have some kind of rapport or relationship with these women; these cannot be good for these men's mentals health

@Januarybluesss They’re just prostitutes

I thought sex workers and sex work were the accepted terms these days? They should be more neutral terms

Only fans only serves to remind us how truly pathetic and disgusting so many men actually are.

It feeds into their cherished idea that we are merely a series of holes there to be bought and sold.

Rank.

Tbf, it's pretty common for high level bodybuilders to do 'gay for pay' on the side.

You work… you are selling your time and labour… similar

Yes. But in many cases it is women who decide to make money by feeding into these male fantasies.

I have no idea if there is any reliable data, but presumably the % of trafficked and coerced OF women is much much lower than that of trafficked and coerced sex workers?

In other words, an OF woman is more likely to choose to do It freely, of her own accord.

So, if you think this is despicable, I think the women who decide to do it freely (and not because it is the only alternative to starvation) should get part of the blame, too.

If instead you take the libertarian approach that there is nothing wrong with it, then no.

OnlyFans is a pyramid shaped scheme with only a very, very small number of 'creators' and the OF company itself making large sums of money. The punters pay a subscription fee to access a specific creator's content. Monthly subscription fees are set at between $4.99 to $49.99. OF takes a 20% commission from these fees.

Fewer than 400 OF accounts earn over $1 million a year. Fewer than 17k of OF's over 3 million creators earn over $50k per year. And there are many (in)famous people, with large Instagram/Twitter/Tiktok followings, on OF. These are the ones making big money; the 'ords' will struggle to make any money at all.

Most accounts take home less than $145 per month (after OF takes its 20% commission). The modal (most common) monthly revenue is $0.00, and the next most common is just $4.99. So just one paying subscriber. $145 is around £106.50. The national minimum wage for 9 hours work equates to more than this at £109.89.

Horribly, OF punters primarily value youth, newness and a willingness to do things on camera others will not. So in their eyes a new creator's value very quickly plummets or her self-respect and human dignity plummets. Those are the choices.

And, as many OPs have said, the internet is forever. So to receive a few hundred dollars at best, there will be mortifying photos and videos of you permanently available for anyone worldwide, to find, download and keep. Reverse image searches are getting more powerful all the time.

So you're setting yourself up to blackmailed for tens or hundreds of thousands in a hopefully comfortable and wealthy middle-age. And your children will find the exact same photos & videos if they (in all innocent curiousity) do the exact same search. All this future misery for a few hundred dollars now.

It's a big, flat, forever hell no from me.

@KitWyn Most accounts take home less than $145 per month (after OF takes its 20% commission). The modal (most common) monthly revenue is $0.00, and the next most common is just $4.99. So just one paying subscriber. $145 is around £106.50.

But that's similar in many professions.
Most musicians don't make a lot of money.
Most writers don't make a lot of money.

The Ed Sheeran Shakira JK Rowling Ken Follett etc of this world are exceptions, one out of thousands if not more

The national minimum wage for 9 hours work equates to more than this at £109.89.

The problem with your statistics is that we don't know how much "work" and time these "creators" put into it. I wonder if many "creators" remain on the platform, dedicating many hours a week to it, and getting paid less than minimum wage. Maybe not.

So you're setting yourself up to blackmailed for tens or hundreds of thousands in a hopefully comfortable and wealthy middle-age. And your children will find the exact same photos & videos if they (in all innocent curiousity) do the exact same search. All this future misery for a few hundred dollars now.

Oh, yes! Exactly right