Hacker News Reader

Comment by pseudo0 | Hacker News Reader

The problem is that those people are the "whales" for these content creators. Normal people with healthy real-world relationships don't spend hundreds or thousands of dollars a month on online parasocial porn addictions. It's like someone selling crack and complaining about how they have to deal with crack addicts.

View on HN

Plenty of drug dealers complain about having to deal with addicts, for what its worth. Signed, an ex-addict.

This is also very well-depicted in The Wire, which came from primary journalistic sources. "Dope fiends" are customers, but most dealers actually despise them. They're disrespected and abused constantly, as well a systematically exploited and tricked (at one point diluting doses is discussed, because of supply restrictions, and eventually deemed a good thing because "we will sell twice as many").

This disdain for their clients also has another insidious layer where dealers will occasionally spike a does with extremely high purity (in the heroin world, they'll use Fentanyl) often leading to an overdose. Because if your shit is so good someone died using it, that gets around the community and it's good for business.

Except it’s nothing like selling crack and the platform isn’t doing enough to keep performers safe.

If a person has your full name (from your Instagram account you use to cross promote your OF) and naked pictures of you what can the platform do at that point to keep you safe?

Realistically the only thing that can be done is not caring about anyone seeing your naked pictures.

When somebody cares about seeing it enough to pay it becomes harder to pretend it's nothing.

Social media users are only just starting to realize that posting pictures when they're on vacation informs all their followers that they aren't at home and could be easily burgled; and the Bling Ring was over a decade ago ;)

Sites like OnlyFans could have mandatory training about not revealing sensitive details (close the curtains before you shoot, take your diploma off the wall, use a stage name, etc.). But yes, your face is a giveaway; and every day it becomes easier to turn a couple breadcrumbs into a full dossier of someone's life.

> Sites like OnlyFans could have mandatory training about not revealing sensitive details

That's a practical proposal that would help.

Onlyfans creator Aella did a guide on camgirling a few years back: https://knowingless.com/2018/11/19/maximizing-your-slut-impa...

How is not taking monetary advantage of lonely men who most likely never have normal human relationships not immoral? People spending money on these things are not your average Joe's. The whole idea is morally corrupt and onlyfans and the like are doing it on scale now.

who defines "normal human relationships", if we don't count various religions? IRL relationships can be just as addictive, toxic and financially perilous.

Taking advantage and having position of power are pretty well defined in current society, these relationships don't have an equal standing between parties.

You should get out of your echo bubble. I have a few friends spending on these types of services (and Twitch which seems to have evolved to host soft versions of OF-type content). They're sociable, principled people, who also have many "regular" relationships. It's not a zero-sum affair.

Looks like you're in a bubble yourself. It's well researched who are those men in that trap spending money. They are lonely and miserable, these so called relationships are toxic and take monetary advantage of them. You can't consent into toxic relationships. Your anecdotes don't matter much in the broad sense.

> It's well researched who are those men

Source needed. A quick Google search turned up nothing.

For someone accusing others of anecdotes, you've yet to provide any actual hard scientific data to support your own sweeping claims.

These are adults, they should be allowed to make bad decisions. Saying they "never had normal human relationships" is a bit condescending.

If those men (and women, I am sure) didn't have porn and onlyfans, they might not have anything at all to replace those. I don't think that's immoral. Both parties benefit, even if one benefits more than the other.

This sounds like libertarian talking point about business, I don't think it suits very well into the discussion.

Its not all men. I know women who also spend on these platforms just because they like to support certain creators. They have other normal relationships too.

I think it would be extremely difficult to achieve the scale OnlyFans has without a large number of “average Joe’s”. Your point about the idea being “morally corrupt” shows the true nature of your comment. Just because the practice or service doesn’t match your morals, does not make it immoral. Sex work is the oldest profession, there’s no reason there shouldn’t be a respectable platform for this kind of work.

The whole point of this thread is about how poorly OnlyFans is managing this complex space.

Both are morally questionable.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com