There was also a recent BBC investigation into OnlyFans that found they constantly bent their rules for popular content makers and had a real problem with sub-18 people on the platform.
So it’s easy to cite 1 case of beastiality and later say there are “200,000 illegal articles” when 199,999 could be spanking.
"I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that.”
- http://cbldf.org/about-us/case-files/obscenity-case-files/ob...
I argue: prostitution is illegal but not reprehensible.
I can understand wanting to fight revenge porn, child porn, human traficing and exploitation, but we’re also making it unreasonable for prostitutes, porn stars and cam girls to do their job. And I kinda doubt that these rules makes much difference to the unlawful actors in those businesses.
I was mainly pointing at the fact it’s “more obviously” illegal than, say, facesitting or spanking.
In what sense are those things illegal?
Interesting article about a protest in 2003
Downvote me all you want for feeling that way.
You're just seeing what you want to see.
Humans don't reason with large numbers very well and I have a hunch that OF was just another recent victim of this psychological phenomenon. Especially when I read attempts to cast them that way with
>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. At the time, OnlyFans said attempts to use the site fraudulently were "rare".
but end up also mentoning:
> Under-18s have used fake identification to set up accounts, and police say a 14-year-old used her grandmother's passport.
aside form these mentions, most of the article focuses on prostitution. Which is a much more gray moral quandry than underage participants.