Pro porn gobbledygook from the Guardian

[Heidi1982]

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/28/onlyfans-scandal-platforms-banks-ban-sexual-content-sex-workers

Is there an archieved version? I don't want to click on the Guardian

archive.is/xpTG5

Standard issue bollocks, basically.

As posted on another thread, I believe this post succinctly sums up the call OnlyFans made, and it couldn't be more cynical and less ethical:

news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28306368

Ooohhh oh dear

Balanced that is not

The banks wanted to get out because of the multiple reports evidence etc of

Grooming
Underage content
Content that pretty obviously was women being forced
And I think beastiality and incest iirc

If you want to make your case then ignoring the issues completely is pretty hopeless. And in this case it's ignoring massive terrible crime. Is really crappy.

This bit. Scare quotes really?!

'Similarly, the UK’s online safety bill – aimed at an array of “dangerous” content, from terrorism to child sexual abuse imagery'

Anyone else read that as "CrowdTit" or was it just me?

Those quotation marks!

I know. Just wtf.

"The financial and tech industries’ prudishness is unfortunately increasingly reflected in government policy, typically under the guise of protecting children and other vulnerable communities. But more often than not, such policies are created without actually consulting those they purportedly seek to protect."

How dare they write 'guise' and protecting children and vulnerable communities in the same sentence. As if children would say no to being protected if asked.

This bit. Scare quotes really?!

'Similarly, the UK’s online safety bill – aimed at an array of “dangerous” content, from terrorism to child sexual abuse imagery'

are they suggesting it is hyperbole to suggest child abuse imagery is dangerous? Or terrorism?

'The banks wanted to get out because of the multiple reports evidence etc of

Grooming
Underage content
Content that pretty obviously was women being forced
And I think beastiality and incest iirc''
----

OnlyFans? Evidence please.

www.bbc.com/news/uk-58255865

In May, BBC News revealed the site was failing to prevent under-18s from selling and appearing in explicit videos, despite it being illegal for children to do so.

He says he has found illegal and extreme content in videos - including bestiality involving dogs and the use of spy cams, guns, knives and drugs. Some material is not actively searched for by moderators as frequently as he believes it should be, says Christof, despite being banned under the platform's terms of service.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57255983

Under-18s have used fake identification to set up accounts, and police say a 14-year-old used a grandmother's passport. The UK's most senior police officer for child protection also says children are being "exploited" on the platform.

Maybe give your deliberately contrary posts a rest on this one, eh BilindaB?

No mention of grooming, underage content, content that pretty obviously was women being forced, or incest there.

'deliberately contrary posts'

Although I have zero interest in watching porn, OnlyfFans seems a much safer way for sex workers to be safe and control their output and make fair money compared to other avenues, things I do care about. Do you care about those issues?

edit -the post above mentions underage children being exploited, so I fair enough, didn't see that.

Also there's nothing wrong with asking for evidence of a claim, is there?

@BilindaB

No mention of grooming, underage content, content that pretty obviously was women being forced, or incest there.

'deliberately contrary posts'

Although I have zero interest in watching porn, OnlyfFans seems a much safer way for sex workers to be safe and control their output and make fair money compared to other avenues, things I do care about. Do you care about those issues?

What do you mean “no mention”?! All those issues are mentioned! Children being exploited, spy cams, bestiality.

and material one moderator believed to be incest

The whole point is it’s presented as a safer way, when in reality it’s just the same old, same old - a seemingly great opportunity to make money from your body, but is still men exploiting women and girls. You clearly don’t care, otherwise you would read the links and realise it wasn’t the ideal you think it is.

It’s time that those who claim to support freedom take a closer look at who is truly the most harmed by the growing culture of digital censorship

Arghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

@BilindaB

'The banks wanted to get out because of the multiple reports evidence etc of

Grooming
Underage content
Content that pretty obviously was women being forced
And I think beastiality and incest iirc''
----

OnlyFans? Evidence please.

It's been in the news a lot try Google.

I'm amazed you would think it wouldn't/ couldn't happen tbh given the format.

I can imagine people saying, and they have said

That content is rare
Moderation gets it
Not a widespread problem but an inherent issue with this type of content hosting

But. Doubt it would happen? Could happen?

Proof? It's been all over the news for weeks.

How did you miss it?
Why given common sense did you find it unlikely or impossible?

If sexual exploitation including of children is happening surely the reaction usually is that's terrible have you got any links. Oh look it's not that bad cos xyz.

Not these days though judging by the report like the link that TOTALLY IGNORES it.

That's really worrying surely?

PM covered this the other day with Evan Davis fawning in a nauseating way over a “performer” and the amount of money she was making. What a shame, I used to like Evan. But what a blatant misogynist he turned out to be.