368
Youth as young as 12 see OnlyFans as an appealing alternative to traditional work, study finds (www.psypost.org)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world
92 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemy.lol/post/50711475

A new study published in the journal Sexuality & Culture has found that many adolescents in Spain, including those as young as 12, are not only aware of OnlyFans but also see it as a viable and even empowering way to make money. In group discussions with over 160 teenagers, researchers discovered that platforms promoting erotic content are influencing how young people—especially girls—view economic opportunity, self-worth, and sexuality. Teens frequently framed content creation as a personal choice or expression of agency, while minimizing the risks.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 1 year ago (7 children)

My point is we as a society would rather see our young population do OF than pay for their college and ensure they have a positive outcome in life that benefits of society. Should a degree be less appealing to individuals on mass than showing your body online? We need fucking teachers magnitudes more than OF models. But when you suggest rasing taxes so people can become teachers, doctors, artist, photographers, parents, electricians, etc. People are opting for~$200 month on OF. A Degree should be valuable again. Not because it qualifies you for a job but it shows you put in work to learn something greater than yourself. Our nation is dead because we don't care. Someone pointing out that there are more people fucking themselves literally on camera, while millions of students have a unqualified teacher (because there's been a 40 year teacher shortage in America no one talks about, so poor schools literally have people who only passed a background check teaching math), overcrowded classes, and underpaid/under supported teachers and staff. But Ya you don't need a degree to start modeling, thank you for pointing out the obvious.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (6 children)

    some of what you say may be true but it's completely irrelevant to the number of OF models vs teachers.

    some of what you are saying is neither true nor exists outside of your disney tinted view of the world.

    Should a degree be less appealing to individuals on mass than showing your body online?

    People who choose to show their body on onlyfans has no bearing on the appeal of a degree. Not only is your opinion prudish and outdated in our sex positive world, you are attempting to take away their agency through shame.

    You have shown no proof that the same people aren't interested in pursuing a degree or don't have a degree. It's not an either or.

    There are a myriad of reasons for the teaching shortage and general state of education today. Wealth distribution should be better and the US needs to vastly improve their social safety nets.

    None of that has to do with OnlyFans. Hell even if you magically fixed just about every one of those issues there would probably still be more OF models than teachers. And I'm sure you'd still find more ways to shout that society is dead.

    A Degree should be valuable again. Not because it qualifies you for a job but it shows you put in work to learn something greater than yourself.

    Btw, a degree is less valuable now because there are more of them. That's a supply and demand problem.

    A degree is only partially about "learning something greater than yourself". That's some romanticized version from books or movies or maybe for affluent white folks. No parents are putting their children in tens/hundreds of thousands in debt for the pursuit of greater learning.

    It has always been about the return on investment from the degree in the way of better opportunities, with a splash of greater learning and finding yourself as an adult.

    Anyway point being no need to blame OF for your cynical views of society.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (5 children)

    I did have this whole response going point by point but I don't think you are understanding what I'm getting at so let me try this way...

    Do you believe our economic, political, and social systems are inherently designed by and is in service of the patriarchy. (my opinion is they are.) and because of that and our unwillingness to destroy those systems means we can dance around our differences in philosophy. But know I understand where you are coming from, however our reality is (because those in power are the ones who actually decide very important things like employment, laws, and social norms do care.) Outside of the top models it's destructive to their future. Unless you, me and everyone else is willing to burn down capitalism, destroy our failed democracy, and reprogram our societies priorities OF is not a wise choice. In fact seeing 12 year olds seeing OF as a more viable option for a career is alarming! I would feel 100 times better about these developments if everyone's basic needs were met.

    Do you believe there would be more or less OF models if everyone's basic needs were met?

    I believe most OF models would choose something else if our patriarchal systems didn't boil individuals down to just a commodity. I don't see OF models as less than. In fact I (just my penis) stared in a couple OF videos with a trans woman. But our realities are different. I wish it was different. But it's not. And its only getting worse. So tread carefully because those who can actual impact these OF models lives hold all the cards.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I'm personally glad we are stepping back to a place of rational discussion. And to preface, i don't mean for any criticism directed at you to be a personal attack but rather challenging the opinion you are holding.

    To start off, yes I'll agree that our society is designed and in service of the patriarchy. I wouldn't agree to a blanket destruction of said system simply because you cannot guarantee any system that comes after it will be "better". It's easier (not that it is easy) and more pragmatic to change the parts we don't like incrementally.

    To that end, one of the ways to make OF modelling less destructive is to reprogram society to not shame women's sexuality and to make it so the choice of OF modeling is not so consequential. This would be preferably than to remove a woman's agency. Funny enough this would upend the patriarchy more than discourging women from expressing their sexuality. And please please note I am not suggesting you mean to literally take away women's choice, nor am I suggesting teens be allowed to do this.

    As for the choice itself, I think there are 2 other points.

    1. it seems the study may be conflating teens saying they feel content creation is a viable future career to them saying they want to be OF models. In general content creators has been a top teen choice for a while now.

    2. You should give the girls more credit as they seem to understand what OF modeling means. The entire article talks about how surprising it is that the teens understood in detail the aspects of OF. Here is an exerpt

    Girls in particular recognized the tension between agency and coercion. Some said it was a personal choice, while others pointed out that financial need often makes the decision feel less than voluntary. A few even likened it to prostitution, questioning whether anyone truly chooses to sell intimate content if they are struggling economically. This tension echoed broader concerns in the literature about how the language of empowerment can mask deeper power imbalances.

    Teens acknowledging that OF modeling is a viable career option does not necessarily mean they want to do it themselves.

    Let me address one now point

    Do you believe there would be more or less OF models if everyone's basic needs were met?

    This question suggests that OF models are being coerced or that it's paying enough to cover basic needs.

    Well i don't believe you have the data on number of OF models being coerced into doing it and we do know and agree that 99% plus of OF models do not make much money, so it can't be covering basic needs.

    So from that, if we lived in a utopia with UBI and everyone could choose what they want to do, I don't know for sure there would be a decrease in OF modeling. It would be the same as asking if I feel there would be a decrease in YouTube or twitch creators. There are a lot of content creators out there because there is a low barrier of entry. I imagine there will always be people wanting to try and eventually growing out of it. It's not about basic needs. It's a lottery ticket to economic mobility.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    My original comment is from a rational point of view as 1. We live in a Patriarchal world regardless of what we want things to be. Having progressive individuals rise through the system is our only path forward because... 2. We are unwilling to "throw the baby out with the bath water." so the Patriarchy is here to stay for a very very long time. Me suggesting that more progressive individuals consider other options to protect themselves from what the Patriarchy has in store for them regardless of their motivations for becoming an OF model; isn't shaming!!! It's the funcking truth!

    This question suggests that OF models are being coerced or that it's paying enough to cover basic needs. Well i don't believe you have the data on number of OF models being coerced into doing it and we do know and agree that 99% plus of OF models do not make much money, so it can't be covering basic needs.

    Yes, I do believe uneducated (because poor area schools are little better than daycare despite all the hard work and love put in by those schools' teachers and staff) individuals are unable to identify the true causes of the pain in their lives, so individuals who have more options that choose OF are less impacted by external factors. And yes I believe many enter as a way to make ends meet and not thinking they are going to be the next viral Model. So either they are delusional/unaware/see no other option. I don't see these people as egotistical, dumb, or naive to the impact being an OF model can and likely will have on their prospects within our current society. So then why is it a growing profession? Why does one demographic of individuals get pulled into that line of work over others? Do more come from poor or rich backgrounds? Are more women or men choosing that as a career? Are the customers of such content more Progressive or Conservative? The answer to all those questions leads one to believe OF isn't just this harmless activity that's empowering individuals. It's in service to and ultimately a way to oppress the vast majority of its content creators. (Sounds a lot like capitalism)

    Finally, Im continously amazed how anyone can think we can save aspects of our current systems. Any return to "normalcy" is a slap to those who suffered under what others perceived as functional or equitable. Marginalized communities deserve better. I don't have all the answers but Capitalism, Communism or whatever we had in the past left more people to suffer so fewer and fewer people could have more. The clock is one minute from midnight. Not trying to be an alarmist but damn is this the best we can muster? (as a collective, humanity is really sad right now)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    To your first and last point, I ask you this: do you believe the Patriarchal world we live in today is the same as the Patriarchal world from 100 years ago? 50 years ago? Even 25 years ago. I don't believe so and that is due to the incremental progress we made.

    Could it be better if we just tore it all down and installed some new system we don't know about yet and have not agreed upon? Maybe. And it could also be much much worse. We have no way of knowing so while you are concerned about the end being near, you also correctly surmised there is no better known solution.

    And yes I believe many enter as a way to make ends meet and not thinking they are going to be the next viral Model. So either they are delusional/unaware/see no other option.

    And you realize this is not what the study is showing right? The study says that the teenagers have a "sophisticated" understanding of how OF works.

    And yes I believe many enter as a way to make ends meet and not thinking they are going to be the next viral Model.

    I mentioned this already but this does not square with your understanding that OF for most people do not pay enough to make ends meet. You can't say there is a sizable number if OF models making a living and also acknowledge that point the top .5% or so actually make real money from the platform.

    So for the vast majority of OF models, they would try it, find out it does not work for them, and exit. Their identity is mostly drowned out by the sheer numbers that exist. Is there still possible societal consequences should they get outed? Yes. BUT i argue that is more reason to change societal views through acceptance rather than promote existing Patriarchal standards in stopping them.

    You ask a lot of questions regarding the data you neither have nor can correlate to "oppression". You're kind of just throwing it out there and saying it is.

    One last point - the article says (emphasis by me)

    "While some teens exposed discomfort with the sexual content associated with OnlyFans, others framed participation as a rational economic decision, especially for girls who might not pursue traditional education or employment

    So the teens think it's a viable economic plan for those who already were but planning to pursue traditional education or employment.

    While it would obviously be better if those who are in this nontraditional bucket had even more options, i would prefer not to limit them more than they are already limited.

    (Humanity has had some pretty low points recently but that was definitely after some highs. And as much as we would like it to be a straight shot up to utopia progress is generally more bumpy than that and it's what makes achievements more satisfying. People probably felt the end of the world during WW2 but look how many highs came after)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    Our arguments are based on prospective. I feel gradual change is only relevant when time isn't a problem. I believe to save current individual from such objectively and current harmful behavior, rather justified or not requires more immediate action via the uprooting of said systems of oppression. My vote isn't going to save a OF model from today from a lifetime of unjustified hardship. Newsom/Stewart/Mamdani/AOC isn't either if they our next president. Nor is any small step by step progress going to save a 12 year old that joins the profession when they come of age. Are they not worth of saving? If yes, we need far more than passive approach. What comes next could be worse. I have more faith in you, my neighbors, and my self that we can take the better path. The environment can't wait for us to maybe hopefully not elect a literal pedophile, rapist, conman to the most powerful position on earth. Current and future workers including sex workers can't wait to see if those with power and money will finally give a shit. The children of today can't wait to see if our next step in the right direction emancipates them from a life of pointless hardship when we have very real, very tangible solutions right here right now... but we have time right? Maybe the next leader won't be corrupted by the money and power?

    Edit: so my advice to go after more current more socially additive work isn't anything but practical. Because we live in a world of small change. And the society of today isn't ready. Maybe if we had more teachers and schools that are fully supported by society OF models can express themselves without worrying about any external pressure because society is educated on more things than just surviving...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    While your objectives are admirable, I can't say I agree with the mindset.

    You keep using that term that you're "saving" these people. But what you're really doing is trying to control these individuals by removing their options and removing their agency. You just don't believe they can make their own choices or that their choice is ever really their own. Teenagers who already have a solid grasp of what OF is, then has up to 6 extra years or more of exposure and experience to the content creation sphere and then decide it is what they want to try? I'm not overly concerned about that.

    We don't have the "time" to save these individuals of today, but most of them don't need your saving. Realistically you are talking about the subset of these individuals that are being exploited or forced into this against their will. But there is no magic button to exterminate exploitation completely. (Not saying people should not try) We are better served shaping the world in a way where those who choose to go into nontraditional work are not stigmatized or facing social consequences.

    No one is suggesting a passive approach to fixing society. Getting involved locally. Voting. Protesting. These things are not passive. And yes we do have time. Who knows this conversation could agree very badly for one of us but history has shown life does on. Society does tend to grow more progressively even if growth is slow. But you know what? Growth and progress, by and large is not measured by the number of OF models we're "saving".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent