Hacker News Reader

Comment by tonymet | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

I know a few people that ‘do’ OnlyFans (…and yes, I don’t know them through via their job). The money they’re making ranges from ‘fairly ok supplementary income’ to ‘more than satisfies their financial needs’.

None have been involved with these ‘online pimps’ as you put it.

I’m not saying that what you’re saying doesn’t happen. I’m aware that you said “a huge segment”. But you’re showing your hand in your final paragraph. If one has a moral etc view to cut this issue one way or another, there’s sufficient anecdata to do so. The reality is that the adult entertainment industry is large and heterogenous.

> Nearly every creator is making little and are forced to make more and more extreme content to compete.

> A huge segment of "creators" are still working for online "networks" aka pimps who force them to share their earnings under threat of abuse.

Can you link some sources for these?

guess they're referring to Andrew Tate and his network, the prosecutors allege that they were behind at least six women, controlling them (including violence) and taking half of their OF income [1]. They themselves claim they have 75 women netting them 600k a month on OF alone, so assuming the prosecutor's claims of them taking 50% hold up it's like 1.2 million a month.

I'm torn a bit here as I happen to know people actually active on their own on OF, but it's on the other side not much of a stretch to assume that the Tate brothers are the only abusive pimps in the game. 600k a month is a ton of money, for a very low effort and low-risk (as long as you don't brag that you bought off police forces) operation.

[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/andrew-tate-alleged-victims-...

It's not safer in any way, at all. The prostitutes are not transitioning to OF. They are using it as a promotional mechanism. So you have not really eliminated the risk for them. In addition to that you have young people who would have never dared to do porn, and you lower the bar enough for them, so that they are now tempted to ruin their dignity.

And finally, the human traffickers like Andrew Tate now have a new platform that allows them to practice their human trafficking from the relative safety of countries like Romania or Ukraine, where the chance that they will be caught and prosecuted is quite low. There have already been cases where multiple OF creators were found to be human trafficking victims working for a pimp.

Don't believe the whole pinkwashing narrative. OF is twice the pimping, making is safer for human traffickers to enslave and profit off women than ever before.

I'm shocked this is downvoted. I guess there are so many porn addicts here that they prefer to cope and ignore all of the abuses that OF is facilitating . What's worse is that the OF financial statement seems to absolve them of responsibility . Vile

Do you have data or research to back these opinions with?

Their opinion on what constitutes "porn" is probably reductive. It's not a straightforward scale or a solid line.

There's a lot of nuance in how far away nudity is from pure lace, to corset, shoulderless, miniskirt, onesie, all the way to burka.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com