7 ms·
I'm glad that monetized platforms like Twitch and OnlyFans exist. It's an accessible way for the younger generations to make ludicrous amounts of money for not
by vsareto 6y ago
I'm glad that monetized platforms like Twitch and OnlyFans exist. It's an accessible way for the younger generations to make ludicrous amounts of money for not too much up-front investment. There's definitely work and downsides involved, just not like some lesser paid, more credentialed professions. Hopefully this puts pressure on the essential jobs in society to actually raise compensation in comparison.
The rest of us boring, unattractive folks will just have to settle for desk jobs.
- ta7345610 6y agoSo the reason society should pay people more for actual work is because creeps like you enjoy throwing thousands of dollars at 18 year olds who will say your name while masturbating on cam? Pathetic.
- prox 6y agoOnlyDeskJobs is my next startup, funding at eleven!
- chr 6y agoI'd subscribe to "Lisp tricks" by Lars Ingebrigtsen or Rainer Joswig.
- zthrowaway 6y agoThe only investment being that they're selling their body for money, and generating a negative presence online that doesn't help their future career aspirations. I don't think this is a good thing to encourage young people to do.
- alisonkisk 6y agoThey are selling pictures of their body. The body gets nearly no wear and tear for the work. There's only negative presence in the sense of haters. Would you also encourage young people to avoid being Black, or Muslim, because that's a "negative presence"?
- rozab 6y agoI would discourage young people from getting face tattoos. I think that's a better analogy.
- bsanr2 6y agoFacial tattoos are a traditional practice for many ethnic groups. Many modern practitioners feel that they're reclaiming a practice that was persecuted under American Puritanism. It's not that there can't be reasonable appearance standards; however, it would be incredibly disingenuous to claim that those standards are established within a neutral cultural atmosphere. I personally find white dudes with short or no hair (the skinhead/cop cut) threatening, but no one's ever going to make that disqualifying.
- memling 6y ago> Facial tattoos are a traditional practice for many ethnic groups. Many modern practitioners feel that they're reclaiming a practice that was persecuted under American Puritanism. I'm curious about this: is there any record of actual Puritans persecuting someone explicitly for having a facial tattoo? (It is true, of course, that Puritans in England and the colonies did not have a modern perspective about the separation of church and state and persecuted minorities like the Quakers. A revulsion to their sense of justice is also pretty understandable, but justice was pretty rough back then, too.)
- dragonwriter 6y ago> I'm curious about this: is there any record of actual Puritans persecuting someone explicitly for having a facial tattoo? Like “fundamentalism”, “Puritanism” is probably more commonly (outside of specific technical discussions of sectarian history or theology) used in a sense which does not refer specifically to the theological group the term technically denotes but a broader (but overlapping, not a superset) group defined largely by a set of traits stereotypical of the group designated by the technical term.
- vsareto 6y agoThere's way more work that goes into making and maintaining that presence than just showing up with a body or personality. A lot is marketing, but it's not like traditional marketing you'd be taught at a university. They're figuring a lot of it out by trial and error, which is some amount of risk of getting it wrong. And popularity can swing quickly and dramatically so you can get fired by the internet mobs (more risk). Not sure why it's a negative presence, either. Anyone who thinks it was a negative presence is not really someone you'd want a job from after making $10,000 - $100,000 a month.
- watwut 6y agoRead about discrimination and hostility former sex workers face. It is very real and can be pretty ugly. Many employers won't hire you and will fire you if they find out - regardless how great worker you at. Plenty of prospective partners take issue with it or can't deal with feelings of resentment, jealousy etc.
- googlethrow3134 6y agoIt’s a negative presence because it presents the moral degeneration of society. Do we really want to hold sex work in the same regard as being an entrepreneur or doctor? What kind of signal do you think that sends?
- corobo 6y ago> The rest of us boring, unattractive folks The battle cry of the can't be arsed. The difference between them and you is you applied for the desk job.
- HuwytNashi_002 6y agoYou're glad that cash-strapped young women are ruining their lives for a new handbag? What prospects do they have for marriage and family after permanently uploading filth to the internet? No high quality man is sticking around after he discovers that bombshell. It has normalised this catastrophic trend. It has eliminated whatever barriers may have been in place. At a societal level, it is degrading and humiliating. I know if I was on the outside looking in, I would never tire of pitifully laughing at a people in a state of collapse where a significant proportion of their young women are doing this without censure or shame.
- SyzygistSix 6y agoI find most jobs to be just as degrading and humiliating as being a cam performer, while stealing more time for less money. Venues like OnlyFans also allow people to cut out pimps and other predatory manager types. Truly, puritanism is not dead.
- jtsiskin 6y agoYeah, construction workers, athletes, etc, are trading their bodies for money. Hell, you could argue some programmers are by sitting 12+ hours. I don’t really see why OnlyFans is any worse
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- jonahrd 6y agoThis is an incredibly misogynistic post. 1) Assuming that making money from OnlyFans is "ruining their lives" is taking a moral high ground based on disallowing women to have control over their sexuality 2) Assuming that these women are performing just to buy handbags..... As if women don't have other reasons to need money just like everyone in society. 3) Assuming that women are searching for a "high quality man" who would disapprove of them having made money off of OnlyCams because it's "filthy". Again, places women in the passenger seat, assumes that they are only around to try to find a quality mate (male) and that their only desirable qualities are their "purity" that has somehow been tarnished. I could go on. This is a disgusting point of view.
- fullshark 6y agoI think it's better than the alternative, as it eliminates the middle man and the performers own the content. But I imagine it will end up like most platforms for content, yielding to superstar economics and a race to the bottom for everyone else whose work has become commoditized and faces unyielding competition for attention. The vast majority of creators on OnlyFans will likely not be able to support themselves I'd guess, or if they will it will only be as supplemental income (I'm saying based on looking at no data).
- leereeves 6y ago> But I imagine it will end up like most platforms for content, yielding to superstar economics and a race to the bottom for everyone else whose work has become commoditized and faces unyielding competition for attention. With 700k creators earning a cumulative total of 700m, and a few of them earning hundreds of thousands or even millions, it sounds like it already has.
- Chris2048 6y agoBy "the younger generations" you mean "the younger generations of women", since I can't imagine many men making as much money. Is this really progress towards equality, or a generation of women self-objectifying themselves.