BBC suggests Only Fans is 'empowering'

[ArabellaScott]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwygdzn4dw4o

What a very depressing article.

Female singer promoting Only Fans:

'it's bit of a punk protest as a woman to take control of my body and sell it' - Kate Nash

'Musicians could follow a lead from people who earn a living from selling sexual content on sites like OnlyFans, she suggested.
...
"Where can we learn from the sex workers? Maybe we can learn something from this industry. How do we get empowered as artists and take a bit more control?"'

That link goes to another article pushing Only Fans as a great way for women to make money. Also mentioned is Lily Allen, selling foot pics on Only Fans.

Absolutely no comment on any potential issues with this. No counter balance.

What is going on?

Plenty of female artists at the moment making plenty of money from tours, merch, streaming, whatever. People pay hundreds for concert tickets. Obviously people don’t like Kate Nash enough or not enough people like her to make a living out of her music. That’s just because she’s not as good/popular as the successful artists.

Lots of people fail to make money from their creative careers. That isn’t a new concept. Does she think because she had a few hits back in the 2000s that she’s guaranteed a living in the music industry for the rest of her life? I don’t get it.

The music industry is fucked. Yes, Ticketmaster makes a lot of money, but most doesn't go to the artists. And streaming makes virtually nothing.

Yup- what's she 'protesting' against, supposedly?!

Hah. The BBC trying to stay relevant is like Laura Kuenssberg trying to sound impartial.

Garbage in, garbage out.

Everyone ought to stop paying their license fee. It's a wholly unfair and unjustified stealth-tax that amounts to funding tory propaganda and other lies.
If enough refuse to pay it, what are the leeches going to do but find a fairer way to fund themselves?

Labour should be all over this like flies on dung after all those lies...

I don't think the BBC is funding Tory propaganda; my beef with them is not doing their jobs, and providing the public with the facts, but rather being overly swayed by dodgy interest groups, exactly the sort of thing the BBC is supposed to expose.

Helle, exactly. It's a v Americanised thing too, I think. Endless makeup & sexualised stuff on IG & TikTok. Everything for sale & commodified. I was reading about the 60s French film Two Or Three Things I Know About Her, which was based on the idea that Frencg society was getting so consumerist bc of adverising that housewives were getting into prostitution to be able to buy extra products. Similar thing here 60 years later..
Funnily I got into Kate Nash recently-she is good but her later albums have been well reviewed but not v commercial. She has done stuff like help Pussy Riot when they were on trial, but clearly lost her way in an attempt to regain the mainstream. Her main influences are riot grrl bands, none of whom have gone on Onlyfans 🙄 (I hope, who knows..).

Utopia, yes in a sense it never went away I guess, but increased tech has given it a new lease of life.. My memory's a bit hazy, but didn't Onlyfans take off during Covid when they had a captive audience?
Construction, yes Living Dolls is v good, & still all too relevant...

I'm surprised Kate Nash and Lily Allen are naive enough to value this highly. I'm their age and now realise that men will look at anything. In fact, many men look at revolting things. A man looking at your OnlyFans doesn't mean you're being adored and yearned for like a goddess. It means he's bored and willing to throw a few quid at whoever is willing to show him her bum.

Yeah, I was thinking that too, surely these kinds of attempts to link content producers to consumers directly already exist? Even a few different models?

Whether they are empowering or not is an interesting question, and would make a great article, because arguably they do have downsides for the artists who use them.

Why bring OF into it?

I think one of the things that muddies the waters with this is that all of a sudden if you are taking your clothes off and simulating sex for a music video, or on an HBO series, it's no longer sex work, it's seen as at least legitimate work in entertainment, or sometimes even art.

Fundamentally, if I am willing to get my tits out in front of a camera crew and a bunch of actors for a legitimate production that will be seen by tens of thousands of people, why not get them out for a smaller amount of money for, chances are, a smaller number of people, when I could use the extra cash?

Tempest, yes, def. I think sex scenes can add to film but it's got ridiculous. Nasty crossover w glut of rape scenes on TV, too. Despite all the intimacy coordinators actors will still feel under pressure bc of all the popular shows demanding nudity & simulated sex. Music videos got far too sexualised since the Britney era. That's partly why I think Taylor Swift got so popular- fandoms depend on teen girls, & her image isn't v sexualised, despite her hyperfocus on love.

Mixie, too true.. I've been reading Gail Dines' Pornland & it's eye opening. To generalise broadly - men are ofc individuals w different preferences- most men aren't v picky about who they find arousing. On forums like Pistonheads you'll find men saying they dated women they couldn't stand otherwise but 'she had big tits, that's enough at this stage', or 'I didn't want to throw her out after we had sex, that's my bar atm'. Ofc women sometimes have fwbs they wouldn't date bc they don't like them enough, or stay w a man out of security rather than love, but I'd argue it's pretty rare for a woman to get together w a man purely bc she wants regular sex & his personality is just about ok.

Yes def- they aren't perfect but at least are a better way than streaming. Tech has made things less personal & on Spotify most of the money doesn't go to the singer, so it's v hard for small artists esp to make a living. But there are ways.
There's also Bandcamp where you can sell vinyls, T-shirts etc . Onlyfans is not the only option.

I've come across an article in Unherd on this topic:
Some points that we've discussed here and also a good connection laid out to the image of women in society, so that it does not only not "empower" the women as they are selling their consent, but also that it underlines women as objects - not really surprising but it is good to see this mentioned in an article.

https://unherd.com/2024/12/the-dirty-secret-about-onlyfans/

Other aspects mentioned are for example that those who leave "sex work" still have their pictures out forever, which can hinder their move to other work, and that, as we discussed here, the glamour that is lended by famous artists like Kate Nash doesn't translate for the everyday woman, as KN still has other options, while for others it might be a last regard.

(Media like Unherd or The Critic are a mixed bag for me; I often strongly disagree with them on topics in other fields (and disagree with the author of the above article in other texts), but these sites have the writers that are only published in select media, like Kathleen Stock, Julie Bindel or Victoria Smith - on a side note, there is an article by Victoria Smith on the PB trial, too.
This mix & match with their authors seems to stem from this media focussing more on the writers and less on an overall political direction; the common denominator is anti- X. But they are a good alternative to the yellow press).

Hopefully Lewis Capaldi doesn't get any ideas.

(Media like Unherd or The Critic are a mixed bag for me; I often strongly disagree with them on topics in other fields (and disagree with the author of the above article in other texts), but these sites have the writers that are only published in select media, like Kathleen Stock, Julie Bindel or Victoria Smith - on a side note, there is an article by Victoria Smith on the PB trial, too.
This mix & match with their authors seems to stem from this media focussing more on the writers and less on an overall political direction; the common denominator is anti- X. But they are a good alternative to the yellow press).

I'd agree, Unherd especially. I usually find their pieces thought-productive, even if I don't particularly agree with them, but the BTL comments are often scary.

Yes, they can be so misogynistic! Often along the lines of, ' Women evolved to care for kids, not tribes, they should stay out of politics & business.' It's worth reading to challenge views & learn more, but I don't bother w the comments.

Re the media, I mention this especially, not only in this thread, because I still grapple with the idea that I agree more with what used to be considered left or green politics, only for the current left and greens to be elsewhere; and that I "have to" read conservative media to find writers who sound reasonable about identity politics and feminism and see behind the smokescreen. It's the same context of debate like voting for conservatives and not green.

I absolutely dislike the association with (in some cases) right wing politics, and I am very aware that the conservative right took on this topic for their own means and in the hope to gain followers for their other politics, too. But the grouping of different political shades also varies from country to country, and conservative or liberal or socialist does not mean the same in every country, both within Europe and Europe compared to the US, Canada or Australia.

On the other hand, in democratic countries it should be possible that people on opposite sides can agree on the same topic and don't oppose it out of principle because it is initiated by the other side (see the Nancy Mace case for example). And the old "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"...

But I totally agree we have to watch out for conservatives turning this into traditionalism and value-thing; and especially The Critic is sometimes very lax on environmental topics vs "the economy".
However, I sometimes guess that the feminist writers I mentioned haven't choosen these media for their alignment with their own political opinions, except for identity politics. It is only that these are the media outlets currently working with them.

I agree with most of that, @ConstructionTime . In fact, it had crossed my mind more than once to wonder whether there was a thread along the lines of 'have we thrown the baby out with the bath-water?', insofar as much as we lament the failings of of most of the 'liberal Left', in falling over themselves to fly the flag for genderism, but that doesn't mean, for me, that I don't still support the base vales of the Left. Too many pieces I'm reading seem to be gaslighting me into thinking, for example, that Donald Trump is all right, really, quoting 'Trump-phobia'. He is very much not all right, don't try to tell me otherwise.

This!
New women are out there winning medals and becoming bank CEOs and winning oscars. It just seems to be people with a cervix that are touting the empowerment of getting your clothes off for money.

Well goodbye Kate and Lilly

"I'd agree, Unherd especially. I usually find their pieces thought-productive, even if I don't particularly agree with them, but the BTL comments are often scary."
@duc748

Yes, they are coming from completely different viewpoints, but it is interesting to see the thought process. And sometimes there are interesting ideas laid out. I'm often disappointed by more middle of the road-media because they don't question things enough. Many articles are just a collection of facts given from press statements, from governments and institutions. I don't think the information is unreliable, but often enough it contracts other articles and no-one looks at the contexts, bigger pictures or problematic outcomes; it's just a bland observing of topics. It isn't as unbiased as it seems, because there isn't enough challenge by some reporters. In that sense, Unherd & co are refreshing, as long as it's clear they have their own agenda.

@duc748
If you want to start a thread on that, I would support it

"Where can we learn from the sex workers? Maybe we can learn something from this

There is nothing glamorous or pleasant about being a sex worker, selling one's body to get used and abused, so men can do whatever they like. It's grim

I think you'll find most sex workers are in it for reasons other than making more money than Tescos. It's a dangerous industry and risk getting injured or even killed. I think you will find most of them are pretty desperate people

Its been interesting over the past few years see a few right wing men who've got involved in 'gender' issues say that for the first time ever they could see with their own eyes sexism in action. And see what feminism was fighting, and what feminism was for.

This doesn't mean those men are magically in accordance with all of feminism's aims. And sure doesnt mean other political views are in accord. But it may have made, or started to make, an impact.

There’s been a political realignment going on everywhere for about a decade, as people come to terms with the fact that liberal social values and leftish economic values don’t necessarily go together – indeed that in practice the former destroy the latter, because you can’t fully divide the economic from the social, and left to itself the money is liberal.

It’s been going on everywhere except the UK at least, it feels like. Here we still don’t seem to be able to separate the two. There’s always so much bewilderment when ‘our’ side support the wrong thing, and so much cognitive dissonance around finding our own views coming from the mouths of our opponents. For some reason people here seem more inclined to stick with their teams, regardless.

Must say it feels a bit weird – I’ve always been used to the UK being one of the cool kids, and I’m not ready for us being the last ones waving the flag for a happy globalised utopia.