Interesting article, I didn’t realize how much content/interaction on onlyfans is faked. I don’t know anyone who admits to using this kind of parasocial pornography. In my social circles it would be embarrassing to admit that this is how you spend your money.
I used to watch [regular] porn when I was younger and had little real-life sexual experience, but coming back to it as an adult I mostly find it kind of weird and off-putting. I’d assume onlyfans gets most of its business from men who have a hard time finding connection in the real world, and maybe don’t even have a sense of what genuine connection looks and feels like. I have a lot of empathy for them.
(Super fascinating read. I'm glad to have come across it.)
Getting paid for sex places women into a traditionally masculine role - they become the pursuer, trying to extract something they want from the opposite gender, competing amongst themselves to be the most attractive to otherwise uninterested targets. In a sense, this forced masculine areas of the internet into adopting defensive feminine norms, as they banned any ‘predatory’ behavior and started socially deriding any sellers as being gross or embarrassing.
The gender assignment makes me scratch my head, though probably in the same manner that people do the same in "normal" discussions where the "gender roles" aren't "reversed". But, I'd easily characterize it as unwelcomingly aggressive sales and marketing.
Earlier in the article:
Sexy subreddits I used to post nudes in with no issues suddenly started instituted rules against me and every other girl who had a link to her OF in her bio. [..] banning accounts that linked to OF, and then sometimes even accounts that linked to any other website which then led to an OF.
These sound like more like communities trying to cope with the aggressive tactics that saturate the forums when a user is just trying to browse content without the bombardment of creators' self-marketing eclipsing the material they are trying to find.
To be fair, I'd feel a lot less aggro when the creator is submitting content accurately in line with the topic or /r/ and without spamming the forum, and some do play nicely in this manner; many people/agents do not.
And sure, in turn, I could get on board with the /r/ moderating their community and not resorting to a blanket ban policy simply for a link to an OF or extra-hop funnel in their profile.
Neither of them are remotely related to having a real conversation with a real woman. That one of then is marginally, microscopically closer means nothing.
A guy was having a wank alone with a video and now he's messaging a low wage worker pretending to be a hot girl. It just doesn't seem like an improvement. The author has an interesting perspective so I'd like to know more.
The interaction is not with the person providing the sexual gratification, it's with a third party, that is what is so bizarre and difficult to understand for me.
Overnight the sex-worker industry shut down in a lot of countries, meaning escorts/prostitutes suddenly had no customers and income.
Early on the "retired" sex workers were the initial largest group of signups. Once in-person work became available again some people preferred to stay online-only, while others dropped out and went back to what they had done in the past.
It's only comparatively recently that "normal" people are signing up, usually due to the lure of "big income, no effort" which is clearly false. I wonder if there needs to be some kind of income disclosure on these sites/apps:
* The average user earns $52.7 / month
Like the various MLM companies are forced to do. Sure some people earn millions, but they're few and far between and they're not working alone.
Anyway for better or worse the whole industry is a little bit fascinating, and terrible. No surprise there I guess.
Comments
Interesting article, I didn’t realize how much content/interaction on onlyfans is faked. I don’t know anyone who admits to using this kind of parasocial pornography. In my social circles it would be embarrassing to admit that this is how you spend your money.
I used to watch [regular] porn when I was younger and had little real-life sexual experience, but coming back to it as an adult I mostly find it kind of weird and off-putting. I’d assume onlyfans gets most of its business from men who have a hard time finding connection in the real world, and maybe don’t even have a sense of what genuine connection looks and feels like. I have a lot of empathy for them.
The related thing is that many of the reddit and tinder accounts promoting these girls are done entirely by marketing agencies.
(Super fascinating read. I'm glad to have come across it.)
The gender assignment makes me scratch my head, though probably in the same manner that people do the same in "normal" discussions where the "gender roles" aren't "reversed". But, I'd easily characterize it as unwelcomingly aggressive sales and marketing.
Earlier in the article:
These sound like more like communities trying to cope with the aggressive tactics that saturate the forums when a user is just trying to browse content without the bombardment of creators' self-marketing eclipsing the material they are trying to find.
To be fair, I'd feel a lot less aggro when the creator is submitting content accurately in line with the topic or /r/ and without spamming the forum, and some do play nicely in this manner; many people/agents do not.
And sure, in turn, I could get on board with the /r/ moderating their community and not resorting to a blanket ban policy simply for a link to an OF or extra-hop funnel in their profile.
I enjoyed reading this but I really need to know more about this closing line.
What is there to like about that?
Behaviourally it's infinitesimally closer to holding a real conversation with real women?
Neither of them are remotely related to having a real conversation with a real woman. That one of then is marginally, microscopically closer means nothing.
A guy was having a wank alone with a video and now he's messaging a low wage worker pretending to be a hot girl. It just doesn't seem like an improvement. The author has an interesting perspective so I'd like to know more.
That's right Bob, the start of the journey isn't the destination. Very insightful.
See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinitesimal
Much like editing responses to answers to questions that should have remained rhetorical and unposed?
It seems clear that the author believes that interaction is an advance over non interactive activity.
The interaction is not with the person providing the sexual gratification, it's with a third party, that is what is so bizarre and difficult to understand for me.
I skimmed read the article, but one critical part that made OF explode to 'household' name is catalyst COVID provided.
Overnight the sex-worker industry shut down in a lot of countries, meaning escorts/prostitutes suddenly had no customers and income.
Early on the "retired" sex workers were the initial largest group of signups. Once in-person work became available again some people preferred to stay online-only, while others dropped out and went back to what they had done in the past.
It's only comparatively recently that "normal" people are signing up, usually due to the lure of "big income, no effort" which is clearly false. I wonder if there needs to be some kind of income disclosure on these sites/apps:
* The average user earns $52.7 / month
Like the various MLM companies are forced to do. Sure some people earn millions, but they're few and far between and they're not working alone.
Anyway for better or worse the whole industry is a little bit fascinating, and terrible. No surprise there I guess.