Hacker News Reader

Comment by verticalscaler | Hacker News Reader

Such drama in the title. Thing is, this is just a self service x-rated YouTube/Instagram. Feminists have been yelling that "sex work is real work, queen" and that it is "empowering to women" for a long time. Can't have it both ways.

You could equally write a hit piece about Snapchat or any number of apps. They're all just messaging apps.

I don't think it is a great idea for an 18yr old to open an onlyfans account neither as a content creator nor as a subscriber but at some point it is consenting adults swapping files and simply mirrors the offline world.

Blaming the tech aspect is deflecting responsibility.

View on HN

This article is about a woman who was raped by two guys who filmed the assault, and they then put the video on onlyfans to sell. The woman says "no" in the video itself according to her lawyer. OnlyFans says they moderate 100% of the videos posted, yet they did not catch this, and they made money on it. You cannot play the common carrier card here.

<very unfortunate and emotional example of terrible thing> therefore... what exactly?

What is your solution?

Onlyfans couldn't exist a decade ago but in the name of normalizing things here we are. I'm confused what in my comment makes you think I'm defending them.

To upload to it the content creator must verify their identity similar to KYC at a bank. If anything you can argue being so stupid as to upload to such an account nonconsensual activities led to a swifter arrest.

You said "blaming the tech aspect is deflecting responsibility", but nobody blamed the tech, they blamed the poor moderation. I was clarifying, not attacking you :)

Why did she have an onlyfans account to be uploaded to in the first place for them to moderate? Something to think about. Not an invitation for an argument.

The assumption in your reply is that it's an account she created/manages, from the sounds of the case it seems like her assailants set the account up.

She didn't. One of her rapists did.

Well when you put it that way it sounds like victim blaming doesn’t it

They definitely do more than traditional porn sites though. The same thing can happen without OnlyFans.

It depends on what you mean by traditional. If you're talking about a "tube" site, then you're probably right. But no namebrand porn studio would do something like that.

I don't think that's true. There are plenty of horror stories from people who have worked in "namebrand" porn studios, including instances of consent being violated.

> There are plenty of horror stories

Of course there are. Some are pushed by marketing.

Sex sells.

Well, "traditional" in the time we're living in - websites, hub and cam sites (going around regulations), and sites where you can sell "your own" "content".

How is that relevant?

Well you see, because other people can break the law apparently means you're allowed to break it too.

How? OnlyFans is not the problem, porn and prostitution are the problem. If it's illegal to sell porn anywhere, only then these things can be fully prevented. Of course, you can't prevent the black market, but the black market is always small.

> If it's illegal to sell porn anywhere, only then these things can be fully prevented.

> the black market is always small

These quotes demonstrate your near complete lack of knowledge on this topic. Very demonstrably wrong on all levels.

I am not an expert on porn, that's true, but porn as bad for both the "creators" and the "fans"! There are plenty and plenty of evidence about it. If we care about people's mental and physical health, this thing should be banned!

Imagine telling a grown adult that they aren't allowed to look at the nipple of a consenting adult or the state will intervene. Absolutely wild take.

Actually, it isn't wild at all. People consent to all kinds of stupid things without realizing the consequences.

Male-presenting nipples are okay. The real scourge to society is ...female-presenting nipples.

Yes, male nipples are totally fine. Plus, there's a vast difference between pornography and erotica!

Just because others do less doesn't mean they do enough.

>The same thing can happen without OnlyFans

By that logic we could get rid of the whole legal system.

No, that's not what I mean, but there has been a media attack on OnlyFans for years. I've read the articles about the shady Russian or Ukrainian owner, but, anyway, the problem as a whole needs to be addressed, not cherry-pick the bad guys!

> The woman says "no" in the video itself according to her lawyer.

Is that evidence of something? It's common as dirt in professionally-produced porn. What's to catch?

The difference is that she is alleging in court that she was not acting.

That can't be the difference. It's literally impossible - the comment above me is blaming OnlyFans for not catching it.

Not noticing something that isn't yet true is not blameworthy by any standard.

If it requires adjudication from a judge, a process that takes many months or even years, complaining about a false-positive moderation on some website is really neither here nor there.

That's just as much an assumption going the other day. It's not unusual for the news to report on allegations made in lawsuits.

Professionally-produced porn has 2257 consent verification documents for every actor. My guess is that OF and the uploaders do not have those documents from this woman.

Why do you assume that? As you've said down thread, her alleged rapists also allegedly stole her identity and defrauded onlyfans.

Try opening an OF account and see how far you get. Since we are speculating I am guessing something doesn't add up in the article as reported. ;)

> Can't have it both ways.

> deflecting responsibility

I think you may have misjudged the bias behind this article.

This was not researched or written by someone previously advocating for the destigmatization of sex work. It was clearly written by someone who's personally very troubled by the industry, who wanted to collect and share some evidence for their concerns and point a finger at an institution large enough to hold focus and possibly even legislative intervention.

You are right that the title is dramatized and the article ignored a lot of context, but it's activist journalism coming from people closer to the Gloria Steinem tradition of feminism (or conservative traditions) -- a very different bunch than the one that have been working towards destigmatization.

This is cannon fire from someone upset with the status quo, not an attempt to have it both ways.

I don't know if it's necessarily the case here, but I've seen a number of outlets do that kind of thing. There will be an article presenting porn or sex work as empowering / liberating and then the very next month there will be an article presenting porn or sex work as inherently exploitative and sexist. Sometimes even by the same author.

The more liberal-leaning media in general kind of treats porn as schrodinger's cat or something. It is apparently dismantling and re-enforcing the patriarchy simultaneously.

The key word is consent. The article describes instances that involve non consenting parties.

> Can't have it both ways.

You seem to be assuming that all women have the same opinions.

>Feminists have been yelling that "sex work is real work, queen" and that it is "empowering to women" for a long time. Can't have it both ways.

I didn't realize Reuters was a "feminist" organization!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com