> But Ava’s parents allowed her to sell Mr. Justin a couple of selfies that she had already posted to Snapchat. They were aware and allowed it. But, not knowin

> But Ava’s parents allowed her to sell Mr. Justin a couple of selfies that she had already posted to Snapchat. They were aware and allowed it. But, not knowing the family's financial circumstances, it raises a difficult question of where to draw the line with this kind of thing. The prospect of allowing your underage daughter to sell media featuring her to this kind of guy is sickening, but if $300 is a lot of money to your family, maybe it becomes easier to excuse? What do you do if he offers $10,000 for something else that's even more disturbing, and you're behind on your mortgage payments? I'm disappointed the author of the piece didn't come right out and say that what TikTok is doing is profiting off of the sexualization of minors (of course the minors get a cut as well, so that apparently makes it okay?). It seems like the only moral path forward would unfortunately be to ban minors from participating, or keep them reaching the levels of fame that would result in them putting themselves (or their families) in a position to have to make the kind of choice I'm talking about above.