3 ms·

Those sad men aren't necessarily interacting with AI-powered chat bots. OnlyFans models have been outsourcing their chatting with fans to workers in the develop

Those sad men aren't necessarily interacting with AI-powered chat bots. OnlyFans models have been outsourcing their chatting with fans to workers in the developing world for years now. As anglophone countries, Nigeria and Kenya have been able to draw a lot of this outsourcing, and the person pretending to be the model is male probably more often than not.

ToucanLoucan 3y ago
I mean, even the "best" version of this is men ready to put down money to interact with a performer which is some combination of AI/exploited overseas worker/exploited sex worker to attempt via the only way they see as viable to fill the yawning chasm of loneliness in their souls. That's still depressing.
- resolutebat 3y ago
  How exactly is the sex worker masterminding the operation being exploited?
  - OfSanguineFire 3y ago
    It’s not always the sex worker masterminding the operation. Especially in Eastern Europe and Southeast Asia, the models are often under the exploitive control of pimps, and it is the pimps who outsource the model’s chatting for the sake of greater income.
  - ToucanLoucan 3y ago
    I mean, in a perfect world, sex workers would choose sex work because it's work they wanted to do. However there are numerous factors that complicate this: 1) The existence of sex pests like Andrew Tate who openly recruit and exploit young women into working for them as adult performers 2) The socio-economic realities of where a given person grows up and is raised in, which greatly affects their prospects in life in general which may artificially make sex work a more appealing option 3) The overarching threat of starvation which may force someone with literally no other options to do it, lest they end up homeless and freeze to death. This is where some feminists and "anti-porn" activists have problems with it, because in an exploitative system that demands you work in some way to survive, there is an argument to be made that no sex work can be truly thought to be entirely devoid of some form of coercion, and therefore the sex involved in that sex work cannot, in turn, be entirely devoid of coercion, which makes it, by definition, rape. I don't particularly subscribe to that belief as I believe it trivializes the free will and agency of performers, but like, I also can't entirely say that it's incorrect. I see the bones of the reasoning and it does make sense to me, and there surely are a ton, an absolutely stressful amount of sex workers out there right now, who are doing it because it is the only path to a decent quality of life available to them (or worse, their sole method of survival due to systemic or more direct threats). And if I found out a given performer who's content I enjoy was one of those people, I can't say I wouldn't be uncomfortable with it.
    - brazzy 3y ago
      > This is where some feminists and "anti-porn" activists have problems with it, because in an exploitative system that demands you work in some way to survive, there is an argument to be made that no sex work can be truly thought to be entirely devoid of some form of coercion, and therefore the sex involved in that sex work cannot, in turn, be entirely devoid of coercion, which makes it, by definition, rape. The part where they completely discredit themselves is where they (almost invariably) draw from this the conclusion that paying for sex work must be made illegal. If women turn to sex work as the only available means to survive, how exactly does it help them to take away that option?
      - ToucanLoucan 3y ago
        > The part where they completely discredit themselves is where they (almost invariably) draw from this the conclusion that paying for sex work must be made illegal. Agreed. > If women turn to sex work as the only available means to survive, how exactly does it help them to take away that option? Well I don't think the goal is to help them, I think the goal is to take away the ability for people to pay to rape them with legal cover. Like it's one thing for sex workers to be selling access to their bodies if it's under the table and illegal, even technically. It's quite another for the justice system of your particular country to go on the record and, in writing, state that you are allowed to coerce sex from another person in exchange for money. And like, again, I don't entirely disagree with that, if you accept the underlying logic that goes: - Anything done for survival is coerced - Sex work for survival is therefore coerced - Sex during sex work done for survival is coerced sex - Coerced sex is rape - Therefore, no sex work done within a system where it is required for survival is consensual. Like, there is a there there. It's uncomfortable but I can't argue it down. Making it illegal surely doesn't help them, but making it entirely legal means you are basically legalizing the ability for people with money to rape women who cannot say no, lest they starve to death. And like... that doesn't feel great either.
        brazzy 3y ago
        I don't care for all that "logic" which is not logical at all, just a bullshit attempt to avoid confronting that reality doesn't work the way you wish it would and you have no way to change that. >Well I don't think the goal is to help them, I think the goal is to take away the ability for people to pay to rape them with legal cover. In other words: you are willing to make life worse for people in order to protect your own sensibilities.

ToucanLoucan 3y ago

I mean, even the "best" version of this is men ready to put down money to interact with a performer which is some combination of AI/exploited overseas worker/exploited sex worker to attempt via the only way they see as viable to fill the yawning chasm of loneliness in their souls. That's still depressing.

resolutebat 3y ago
How exactly is the sex worker masterminding the operation being exploited?
- OfSanguineFire 3y ago
  It’s not always the sex worker masterminding the operation. Especially in Eastern Europe and Southeast Asia, the models are often under the exploitive control of pimps, and it is the pimps who outsource the model’s chatting for the sake of greater income.
- ToucanLoucan 3y ago
  I mean, in a perfect world, sex workers would choose sex work because it's work they wanted to do. However there are numerous factors that complicate this: 1) The existence of sex pests like Andrew Tate who openly recruit and exploit young women into working for them as adult performers 2) The socio-economic realities of where a given person grows up and is raised in, which greatly affects their prospects in life in general which may artificially make sex work a more appealing option 3) The overarching threat of starvation which may force someone with literally no other options to do it, lest they end up homeless and freeze to death. This is where some feminists and "anti-porn" activists have problems with it, because in an exploitative system that demands you work in some way to survive, there is an argument to be made that no sex work can be truly thought to be entirely devoid of some form of coercion, and therefore the sex involved in that sex work cannot, in turn, be entirely devoid of coercion, which makes it, by definition, rape. I don't particularly subscribe to that belief as I believe it trivializes the free will and agency of performers, but like, I also can't entirely say that it's incorrect. I see the bones of the reasoning and it does make sense to me, and there surely are a ton, an absolutely stressful amount of sex workers out there right now, who are doing it because it is the only path to a decent quality of life available to them (or worse, their sole method of survival due to systemic or more direct threats). And if I found out a given performer who's content I enjoy was one of those people, I can't say I wouldn't be uncomfortable with it.
  - brazzy 3y ago
    > This is where some feminists and "anti-porn" activists have problems with it, because in an exploitative system that demands you work in some way to survive, there is an argument to be made that no sex work can be truly thought to be entirely devoid of some form of coercion, and therefore the sex involved in that sex work cannot, in turn, be entirely devoid of coercion, which makes it, by definition, rape. The part where they completely discredit themselves is where they (almost invariably) draw from this the conclusion that paying for sex work must be made illegal. If women turn to sex work as the only available means to survive, how exactly does it help them to take away that option?
    - ToucanLoucan 3y ago
      > The part where they completely discredit themselves is where they (almost invariably) draw from this the conclusion that paying for sex work must be made illegal. Agreed. > If women turn to sex work as the only available means to survive, how exactly does it help them to take away that option? Well I don't think the goal is to help them, I think the goal is to take away the ability for people to pay to rape them with legal cover. Like it's one thing for sex workers to be selling access to their bodies if it's under the table and illegal, even technically. It's quite another for the justice system of your particular country to go on the record and, in writing, state that you are allowed to coerce sex from another person in exchange for money. And like, again, I don't entirely disagree with that, if you accept the underlying logic that goes: - Anything done for survival is coerced - Sex work for survival is therefore coerced - Sex during sex work done for survival is coerced sex - Coerced sex is rape - Therefore, no sex work done within a system where it is required for survival is consensual. Like, there is a there there. It's uncomfortable but I can't argue it down. Making it illegal surely doesn't help them, but making it entirely legal means you are basically legalizing the ability for people with money to rape women who cannot say no, lest they starve to death. And like... that doesn't feel great either.
      - brazzy 3y ago
        I don't care for all that "logic" which is not logical at all, just a bullshit attempt to avoid confronting that reality doesn't work the way you wish it would and you have no way to change that. >Well I don't think the goal is to help them, I think the goal is to take away the ability for people to pay to rape them with legal cover. In other words: you are willing to make life worse for people in order to protect your own sensibilities.